Oak  Street  ^ 

JMBOLDT  LIBRARY.  no.82 

UNCLASSIFIED , 

$1,50  a year  (12  numbers).  Entered  at  the  Arew  York  Post 

Office  as  Second-Class  Mail  Matter. 

ILLUSIONS  OF  THE  SENSES : 

AND  OTHER  ESSAYS. 

BY 

RICHARD  A.  PROCTOR. 


ft$U*A  New  Volume  of  the  HUMBOLDT  LIBBAR  Y is  now  ready , 
comprising  Nos,  71— SO  inclusive.  Price , cloth,  $1,75, 


THE  CELEBRATED 


PIANOS. 


SOHMER 


PIANOS. 


ABE  AT  PBESENT  THE  MOST  POPULAR 

AND  PREFERRED  BY  THE  LEADING  ARTISTS. 

Musical  authorities  and  critics  prefer  the  66  SOHJIER  ” Pianos,  and  they  are  purchased  by  those 
possessing  refined  musical  taste  and  appreciating  the  richest  quality  of  tone  and  the  highest  perfection 
generally  in  a Piano. 

THE  SOHMER  PIANOS  ARE  USED  IN  THE  FOLLOWING  INSTITUTIONS: 

N.  Y.  College  of  Music;  Vogt’s  Conservatory  of  Music  ; Villa  Maria  Convent,  Montreal;  Villa 
de  Sales  Convent,  Long  Island  ; N.  Y.  Normal  Conservatory  of  Music  ; Philadelphia 
Conservatory  of  Music,  and  most  all  the  leading  first-class  theatres  in  NEW 
YORK  AND  BROOKLYN. 

Received  First  Prize  at  Centennial  Exhibition,  Philadelphia,  1876. 

Received  First  Prize  at  Exhibition,  Montreal,  Canada,  1881  and  1882. 

SOHMER  & C O., 

MANUFACTURERS  OF  GRAND,  SQUARE  AND  UPRIGHT  PIANOFORTES. 

Warerooms,  149, 151, 153  & 155  East  14th  Street,  N.  T. 


S.  FITZGERALD,  PUBLISHER, 

108  CHAMBERS  STREET, 

,\!EW  YORK. 


ABANDON  PHYSIC! 

GLUTEN  SUPPOSITORIES 

CURE  CONSTIPATION  AND  PILES. 

m.  cnflw^r  from  Ponstmation  and  Piles  should  test  the  GLUTEN  SUPPOSITORIES  which* 
cure  mosifas^  by' INCREASING  THE  NUTRITION  OF  THE  PARTS,  thus  inducing  desire  and 

8trei)gRhAniW  Thompson, °N ortham pt  on , Mass.,  says:  * I have  tested  the  Gluten  Suppositories,  and 

consider  them  valuable,  as,  indeed,  I expected  from  the  excellence  of  then  theoiy. 

C°nfI)iLrWM.rToD  HELMUTH  declares  the  G!uten  Suppositories  to  be  “ the  best  remedy  for  constipa 
ti°n  wWo^Ihave>everprm!ribed.ep>  sOSayI  o,  JOur  Oluten  Suppositories:  God  bless  the  ma»»ho. 
thiented  tljem^a  L.  Rj^lky.  BuHHigori^Vt.00^  Oompai)y.  Gluten  Suppositories,  as  they  have 

KtfSSSSd  substantia!  relief  through  the  use  of  the  Gluten  Suppositories  -Cyrus  Bradbury,  Hope 

4alefe*0  Cents  by  Mail.  Circulars  Free. 

HEALTH  FOOD  CO.,  4th  Avenue  and  10th  St.,  N.  Y, 


JOURNAL  of  MICROSCOPY 
AND  NATURAL  SCIENCE 

Is  published  quarterly  in  London,  on  the  first  days  of  January,  April,  July 
and  October. 

The  Journal  contains  64  pages  of  letterpress,  octavo  size,  with  woodcuts- 
and  numerous  full-page  lithograph  plates. 

While  Microscopy  occupies  the  most  prominent  place,  the  Journal  always 
contains  valuable  articles  on  several  branches  of  Natural  Science  as  Botany, 
Entomology,  Geology,  Photography,  etc. 

Subscription  price  $1.75  per  year. 

The  Journal  and  the  Humboldt  Library  for  one  year  only  $3.00. 

Agent  for  the  United  States  : 

J.  FITZGERALD, 

108  Chambers  Street,  New  York. 

TWO  VALUABLE  WORKS  ON  MUSIC. 

By  ISAAC  L.  RICE,  LL.B., 

Lecturer  in  Columbia  College , New  York. 


I.  What  is  Music?  Price,  cloth,  50  cents;  paper  25  cents. 

Evening  Post , N.  Y.— “ Cannot  fail  to  fascinate  those  who  are  fond  of  music,  or  of 
contemplating  the  laws  which  in  the  works  of  nature  are  seen  in  full  operation.” 

II.  How  the  Geometrical  Lines  Have  their  Counterparts  in 

IV^tsic.  Price,  paper,  12  cents. 

Evening  Ma^-  N.  Y “ Manifests  subtle  thought  and  a keen  perception  of  the  deep 
foundation  on  which  music  rests.” 

As  these  works  ari6  not  for  sale  by  the  book  trade,  orders  should 
be  sent  direct  to 

J.  FITZGERALD, 

I 108  Chambers  Street,  N.  Y. 


\VV 


ILLUSIONS  OF  THE  SENSES: 
AND  OTHER  ESSAYS. 

By  RICHARD  A.  PROCTOR. 


ILLUSIONS  OF  THE  SENSES. 

Professor  Le  Conte  of  the  Cali- 
, fornia  University  has  recently  pub- 
- - lished  in  the  North  American  Review 
' an  interesting  paper  on  the  Evidence 
of  the  Senses,  in  which  he  shows  that 
; on  the  one  hand  the  senses  often 
\ afford  most  incorrect  information 
j>  while  on  the  other  the  powers  of  such 
? scientific  instruments  as  give  exact 
r'  information  would  be  utterly  unsuit- 
able substitutes  for  our  less  exact 
senses.  Sight  tells  us  that  an  object 
- is  flat  when  it  is  round,  touch  that  an 
object  is  double  when  it  is  single, 
hearing  that  sounds  come  from  close 
by  when  they  really  reach  us  from  a 
great  distance ; but  on  the  other 
hand  to  have  eyes  with  telescopic 
power,  or  fingers  as  sensitive  as  a 
chemist’s  balance,  or  ears  with  the 
sound-gathering  qualities  of  the  micro- 
phone, would  unfit  us  for  the  kind  of 
life  we  have  to  lead  upon  this  work-a- 
day  world  of  ours. 

I propose  now  to  discuss  the  ques- 
tion dealt  with  by  Le  Conte,  with 
special  reference  to  the  liability  of 
our  senses  to  various  forms  of  error. 
Taste  and  smell  need  not  here  occupy 
our  attention.  They  are  less  used 
than  the  other  senses  in  scientific  re- 
search ; and  so  far  as  the  purposes  to 
which  they  are  chiefly  directed  are 
concerned  they  are  in  the  main  trust- 


\ 


worthy.  They  may  deceive  us  by 
presenting  as  pleasant  what  is  really 
deleterious,  but  once  experience  has 
determined  the  qualities  and  effects 
of  substances  having  such  and  such 
taste  or  odor,  we  are  not  Often  de- 
ceived in  identifying  those  substances 
thereafter. 

The  sense  of  touch  is  commonly 
understood  as  including  the  sense  of 
heat-effects.  But  here,  as  Reid  long 
since  pointed  out,  our  division  of  the 
senses  is  unsound.  Undoubtedly  the 
sense  of  touch  is  entirely  distinct 
from  the  sense  of  heat, — though  we 
may  be  said  to  feel  in  both  cases, 
The  error  probably  arose  from  the 
circumstance  that  the  same  organs 
seem  employed  in  noting  the  effects 
of  contact  and  the  effects  of  heat.  I 
touch  a surface  to  see  if  it  is  hard  or 
soft,  rough  or  smooth,  just  as  I touch 
a surface  to  see  if  it  is  hot  or  cold ; 
moreover  there  is  no  part  of  the  body 
which  is  sensible  to  the  effects  of 
contact  which  is  not  also  sensible  to 
the  effects  of  heat  and  cold.  But  we 
recognize  a marked  difference  be- 
tween the  sense  of  touch  when  the 
tip  of  the  tongue  is  employed  for  the 
moment  as  the  organ  of  touch,  and 
the  sense  of  taste ; yet  the  difference 
between  taste  and  touch  is  not  more 
marked  than  the  difference  between 
heat  and  touch. 

Therefore  in  dealing  with  errors 


2 


ILLUSIONS  OF  THE  SENSES  : 


affecting  the  evidence  given  by  the 
sense  of  touch,  I consider  only  those 
really  relating  to  the  effects  of  con- 
tact, dealing  separately  with  those  re- 
lating to  the  effects  of  heat  and  cold. 

Aristotle  long  since  pointed  out 
how  the  sense  of  touch  may  be  de- 
ceived when  the  organs  of  touch  are 
employed  in  some  unaccustomed 
manner.  It  was  he  who  first  men- 
tioned, if  he  did  not  invent,  the  ex- 
periment of  rolling  a pea  between  the 
tips  of  the  first  and  second  fingers, 
after  the  second  finger  has  been 
crossed  over  the  first.  This  experi- 
ment is  instructive  as  showing  how 
much  of  the  significance  of  the  teach- 
ings of  our  senses  may  be  due  to  the 
effect  of  long-continued  training. 
Every  time  we  touch  with  the  finger- 
tips an  object  of  known  shape,  we  are 
in  reality  teaching  our  fingers  that 
Such  and  such  impressions  have  such 
and  such  a meaning.  When  two  fin- 
gers are  crossed,  the  finger-tips  re- 
ceive different  impressions  from  those 
which  they  receive  in  their  normal 
position,  and  we  naturally  misinter- 
pret the  meaning  of  the  impressions 
so  received.  Thus  if  I touch  with 
my  first  and  second  fingers  the  sides 
of  a space  shaped  thus  w,  the  out- 
sides of  the  fingers  come  in  contact 
with  the  curved  surface,  whereas  the 
insides  of  the  fingers  feel  such  a sur- 
face as  this, — ^ : so  soon  as  the 
fingers  are  crossed  these  effects  are 
reversed ; the  outsides  of  the  fingers 
are  brought  together  by  the  crossing 
and  touch  a surface  shaped  thus^, 
telling  us  apparently  that  it  is  really 
a surface  shaped  thus  ^ that  we  are 
touching.  To  test  this  apply  the 
crossed  fingers  to  a surface  shaped 
/-v-s,  so  that  the  fingers  touch  the 
convex  curves  near  their  place  of 
meeting;  now  we  find  that  we  no 
longer  seem  to  be  touching  two 
curves,  but  one.  It  must  be  admitted, 
however,  that  this  experiment  is  less 
striking  than  the  other ; the  informa- 
tion conveyed  by  the  finger-tips  in- 
stead of  seeming  definitely  and  de- 
cidedly incorrect,  appears  but  vaguely 
erroneous. 


Let  us  try  a few  other  experiments 
with  crossed  fingers.  Take  a pen- 
holder or  pencil,  and  with  first  and 
second  fingers  crossed  slide  the  fin- 
ger-tips along  the  pencil  or  holder. 
If  the  eyes  are  closed  the  fingers 
seem  to  tell  us  emphatically  hai  we 
are  feeling  two  parallel  rods.  Yet  u. 
the  eyes  are  directed  to  the  finger- 
tips the  illusion  disappears.  This  is 
not,  however,  because  the  eyec  assure 
us  that  there  is  but  one  pen  or  pencil ; 
it  is  because  the  eyes  show  us  that 
the  fingers  are  crossed.  To  show 
that  mere  knowledge  will  not  save  us 
from  the  illusion,  feel  with  the  crossed 
fingers  the  tip  of  the  nose.  We  know 
certainly  that  we  have  but  a single 
nose-tip  ; yet  the  absurd  and  illusory 
feeling  that  we  have  two  noses  is  inv 
mediately  produced.  The  illusion  is 
strengthened  if  the  crossed  finger-tip*' 
are  caused  to  slide  along  the  ridge  of 
the  nose.  Very  curious  illusions  are 
produced  if  the  crossed  finger-tips  are 
carried  along  either  lip,  or  between 
the  lips,  or  along  the  bone  ridge 
below  either  eye  or  along  the  ridge 
above  the  eye,  or  round  the  ear,  and 
so  forth.  But  in  my  own  case,  the 
oddest  illusion  of  all  is  obtained  by 
crossing  the  forefinger  behind  the 
little  finger,  (both  being  bent  some- 
what toward  the  palm,  so  that  the 
second  or  third  fingers  are  behind 
them)  and  then  feeling  with  these 
crossed  fingers  the  tip  of  the  nose; 
for  now,  not  only  does  the  nose  ap- 
pear double,  but  one  ?iose  appears  to 
be  longer  than  the  other.  One  can 
easily  understand  why  this  is.  Under 
ordinary  conditions  the  first  and  little 
fingers  cannot  at  the  same  moment 
feel  two  bodies  which  are  equidistant 
from  the  observer, — or  let  us  say  from 
the  palm.  If,  for  instance,  we  place 
the  forefinger  tip  on  the  end  of  a 
white  note  on  the  piano,  the  little 
finger  tip  can  only  rest  on  the  end  of 
another  white  note  by  bending  the 
hand : we  can,  however,  touch  an  end 
of  a black  note  with  the  forefinger  tip 
while  the  third  finger  tip  touches  the 
end  of  a black  note,  without  bending 
the  hand.  The  lesson  taught,  then, 


AND  OTHER  ESSAYS. 


3 


by  constant  experience  (unnoticed 
through  its  very  familiarity)  is  that 
two  bodies  so  felt  extend  to  different 
distances.  But  in  the  experiment 
with  crossed  forefinger  and  little  fin- 
ger, the  finger-tips  touch  at  the  same 
moment  the  same  nose-tip,  which 
appears  double  because  touched  by 
the  outside  edges  of  the  fingers,  and 
the  two  noses  appear  of  unequal 
length  because  it  seems  as  though  the 
little  finger  touched  one  while  the 
forefinger  touches  the  other,  each  of 
them  at  the  tip. 

Other  singular  effects  may  be  pro- 
duced by  crossing  the  fingers,  varying 
the  combinations.  If  the  forefinger 
and  second  finger  of  the  left  hand  be 
crossed  as  well  as  those  of  the  right, 
and  a small  object  be  held  between 
the  crossed  pair  of  each  hand,  the 
most  incorrect  ideas  of  the  shape  of 
the  object  are  given.  I have  just 
tried  the  experiment,  for  instance,  on  a 
small  box  of  pen-nibs,  holding  two 
opposite  corners,  one  between  the 
crossed  finger-tips  of  the  right  hand, 
the  other  between  those  of  the  left 
hand ; it  was  impossible  to  realize 
that  the  object  thus  held  had  any  reg- 
ularity of  shape  at  all. 

Another  experiment  on  the  sense  of 
touch  depends  on  the  circumstance 
that  usually  the  outsides  of  the  hands 
are  so  placed  that  if  both  touch  two 
surfaces  at  the  same  time  those  sur- 
faces are  not  in  the  same  direction. 
Of  course  the  two  hands  can  be 
placed  side  by  side  with  their  backs 
uppermost  and  a flat  surface  may  so 
touch  both  ; but  usually  the  palms  are 
toward  each  other,  and  this  is  es- 
pecially the  case  when  both  hands  are 
used  in  holding  anything.  Place  the 
hands  together,  palm  to  palm,  then 
cross  the  arms  so  that  the  hands  are 
back  to  back ; if  now  a book  is  held 
between  the  backs  of  the  hands  its 
edge  appears  bent.  The  force  of  this 
illusion  is  different  with  different  per- 
sons ; but  let  not  those  who  are  not 
affected  by  it  rejoice  as  being  less 
easily  deceived  than  their  fellows ; 
for,  as  Sir  David  Brewster  remarks  in 
speaking  of  an  illusion  affecting  sight. 


it  often  happens  that  the  most  observ- 
ant are  those  most  completely  de- 
ceived by  such  illusions. 

There  is  another  curious  illusion  of 
touch  which  appears  to  depend  on  the 
teaching  which  the  hands  and  arms 
have  had  (unconsciously)  in  estimat- 
ing the  dimensions  of  bodies  held  in 
the  normal  way,  in  front  of  the  body. 
Suppose  a book  lying  on  a table  be- 
fore you,  the  back  of  the  book  being 
toward  the  right.  Take  hold  of  it 
by  the  nearest  right-hand  corner  (that 
is,  holding  it  by  the  end  of  the  back 
nearest  to  you)  and  pass  it  over  the 
right  shoulder  so  that  the  face  which 
had  been  uppermost  lies  against  the 
back  of  the  right  shoulder  in  a nearly 
vertical  position.  Now  pass  the  left 
hand  round  behind  you  under  the  left 
shoulder-blade  till  you  can  grasp  with 
it  the  edges  of  the  leaves.  You  will 
now  find  that  though  you  know  from 
the  feel  of  the  edges  that  your  left 
hand  holds  a side  several  inches  from 
the  back  held  by  the  right  hand,  that 
side  of  the  book  appears  to  be  a con- 
tinuation of  the  back  of  the  book, — so 
far  as  direction  [is  concerned.  The 
explanation  appears  to  be  simply 
this  : — When  an  object  like  a book  is 
held  in  front  of  the  chest,  the  right 
hand  holding  one  side,  the  left  hand 
reaches  the  opposite  side  without 
effort  or  stretching ; while  with  a 
slight  amount  of  stretching  the  side 
held  by  the  right  hand  can  be  reached  ; 
now  when  the  book  is  held  behind  the 
back  in  the  way  described  above,  an 
effort  is  required  to  reach  with  the  left 
hand  the  side  opposite  that  held  by 
the  right,  hence  the  same  effect  is 
produced  on  the  mind  as  when  in  the 
normal  way  of  holding  objects  of  the 
kind  the  left  hand  is  stretched  over 
to  the  right  hand’s  side  of  the  object ; 
thus  instead  of  the  left  hand  touching 
the  side  opposite  that  held  by  the 
right,  it  appears  to  touch  the  same 
side. 

So  much  for  illusions  affecting 
touch.  Or  rather,  these  afford  suffi- 
cient evidence  that  the  sense  of  touch 
may  be  readily  deceived.  But  in 
reality,  scarcely  a day  passes  without 


4 


ILLUSIONS  OF  THE  SENSES: 


our  noticing,  if  we  are  at  all  observ- 
ant, illusions  “affecting  this  sense.  If 
we  observe  the  circumstances  under 
which  such  illusions  occur  we  gener- 
ally find  that  they  arise  when  some 
organ  of  touch  is  used  in  a novel  or 
unusual  way.  But  in  the.  majority  of 
cases  arising  in  ordinary  life  the  sense 
of  touch  acts  in  combination  with 
either  the  sense  of  sight  or  the  sense 
of  hearing,  and  consequently  the  illu- 
sions arising  are  not  such  simple  ex- 
amples of  errors  in  the  evidence 
afforded  by  the  sense  of  touch  as 
those  considered  above. 

The  sense  of  heat  is  in  like  man- 
ner usually  associated  with  the  sense 
of  sight,  so  that  illusions  affecting  it 
are  either  corrected  or  modified  by 
visual  impressions.  Yet  there  are 
cases  where  this  sense  is  deceived 
when  acting  alone.  For  instance, 
there  is  the  well  known  experiment 
in  which  after  one  hand  has  been 
placed  for  a time  in  water  as  hot  as 
can  be  borne,  and  the  other  in  ice- 
cold  water,  both  hands  are  plunged 
simultaneously  into  tepid  water.  Im- 
mediately the  hand  which  had  been 
in  very  hot  water  recognizes  a com- 
fortable sense  of  coolness,  and  as  it 
were  pronounces  the  water  cold  ; the 
other  hand  as  quickly  recognizes  a 
comfortable  sense  of  warmth  and 
pronounces  the  self-same  water  hot. 
Here  even  sight  will  not  correct  the 
Illusion.  We  see  as  plainly  as  possi- 
ble that  both  hands  are  in  the  same 
basin,  yet  one  hand  seems  to  be  in 
warm  water,  the  other  in  cold.  I 
find  a singular  effect  produced  if 
while  the  attention  is  strongly  di- 
rected to  the  circumstance  that  both 
hands  are  in  the  same  water,  the 
hands  are  freely  moved  about  in  the 
water.  For  it  seems  then  as  though 
there  were  currents  of  hot  and  cold 
water  in  the  same  basin,  moving  so 
as  to  follow  or  rather  to  accompany 
the  hands. 

Without  making  definite  experi- 
ment in  this  way,  we  can  easily  in 
the  ordinary  experiences  of  life,  rec- 
ognize the  readiness  of  the  heat 
sense  to  be  deceived.  Thus  we  come 


out  of  a warm  room  into  the  hall  out- 
side and  find  the  air  there  pleasantly 
cool.  We  then,  perhaps,  see  a friend 
home  through  the  cold  night  air  and 
presently  return  to  the  same  hall. 
But  now,  coming  into  it  from  the  cold 
outer  air,  we  find  it  pleasantly  warm. 

Professor  Le  Conte  remarks  that 
“ during  the  Arctic  voyages  made  by 
Parry,  Franklin,  Ross,  Kane,  Nares, 
and  others,  it  was  found  that  a zero 
temperature  seemed  quite  mild  after 
the  thermometer  had  been  twenty  or 
thirty  degrees  below  that  point.” 
But,  although  in  California  temper- 
atures of  twenty  or  thirty  degrees 
below  zero  may  not  be  common,  an 
American  has  no  occasion  to  leave 
the  United  States,  or  even  the  mid- 
dle states,  to  experience  the  illusion 
in  question.  I have  repeatedly 
walked . along  the  streets  of  New 
York  with  the  temperature  a degree 
or  two  below  zero,  without  wearing 
an  overcoat  or  feeling  the  want  of 
one,  when  such  a temperature  has 
followed  a few  days  of  much  colder 
weather.  And  conversely,  even  as 
I write  I am  feeling  unpleasantly 
cold  at  Columbia,  South  Carolina, 
with  the  temperature  only  just  below 
zero  (and  the  air  still),  simply  be- 
cause I have  been  enjoying  during 
the  last  few  days  in  Charleston,  S.  C., 
a soft  and  balmy  warmth  resembling 
that  of  a June  day  in  England. 

Again,  in  caverns  like  the  Mam- 
moth Cave,  Kentucky,  or  Kent’s 
Hole  in  Devonshire,  there  is  in  sum- 
mer always  a sense  of  coldness  and 
in  winter  always  a sense  of  heat,  yet 
in  reality  the  thermometer  shows 
that,  as  might  be  expected,  the  air  is 
somewhat  warmer  within  such  caves 
in  summer  than  it  is  in  winter.  Here, 
then  the  illusion  is  not  only  incor- 
rect but  the  very  contrary  of  the 
truth ; the  air  seems  colder  when  it  is 
really  warmer  and  warmer  when  it  is 
really  colder.  Because  the  range  of 
temperature  is  much  less  within  the 
cave  than  in  the  open  air,  we  are  de- 
ceived into  ike  idea  that  the  tempera- 
ture really  ranges  the  reverse  way 
from  that  in  which  it  actually  varies. 


AND  OTHER  ESSAYS. 


D 


A muic  subtle  illusion  relating  to 
heat  is  that  arising  from  difference 
in  the  conducting  power  of  various 
substances  with  which  the  skin  is 
brought  into  contact.  Thus  if  we 
plunge  into  water  of  the'  very  same 
temperature,  when  tested  by  the  ther- 
mometer, as  the  surrounding  air, 
both  being  really  cooler  than  the 
body,  the  water  seems  cold,  because 
being  a better  conductor  than  air,  it 
immediately  begins  to  carry  off  more 
of  the  body’s  warmth.  On  the  con- 
trary, the  self-same  substance — water 
— not  only  feels  hot  but  is  unbear- 
ably hot  when  at  a temperature  far 
below  that  of  the  surrounding  air  in 
a Turkish  bath. 

It  is  to  be  noticed  that  in  this  case 
the  sense  of  heat  while  in  one  respect 
leading  to  an  erroneous  idea,  in  an- 
other and  a much  more  important 
point  gives  correct  information.  If 
one  were  to  trust  the  teachings  of  the 
thermometer,  and  infer  that  one 
might  as  well  remain  in  water  as  in 
air  seeing  that  the  water  and  the  air 
are  of  the  same  temperature,  one 
would  make  a serious  mistake,  and 
suffer  a good  deal  of  harm  through 
the  rapid  abstraction  of  warmth  from 
the  body.  The  heat  sense,  by  telling 
us  wrongly  that  the  water  is  colder 
than  the  air,  conveys  at  least  the 
much  more  important  information 
that  we  are  losing  heat  while  in  the 
water, — and  therefore  saves  us  from 
the  danger  of  getting  unduly  chilled, 
as  we  might  if  we  trusted  to  the  ther- 
mometer alone.  In  the  reverse  case, 
the  sense  of  heat  acts  even  more  di- 
rectly and  emphatically  for  our  bene- 
fit. 

I remember  a case  in  point  which 
occurred  at  the  Hummums.  Some 
one  who  had  heard  that  the  tem- 
perature of  water  in  the  hot  rooms 
is  always  much  lower  than  the  tem- 
perature of  the  air,  but  had  not 
considered  the  matter  with  actual 
reference  to  the  requirements  of  the 
human  body,  supposed  that  he  would 
gain  decidedly  in  comfort  if  instead 
of  sitting  on  the  non-conducting  felt 
or  flannel  of  the  seats,  he  were  to 


substitute  a roll  of  towels  well  soaked 
in  water.  He  found  as  a matter  of 
fact  that  the  arrangement  thus  sug- 
gested by  the  thermometer  was  very 
far  from  being  welcomed  by  the 
nerves  of  touch, — whose  repugnance 
to  the  arrangement  was  indeed  most 
emphatic. 

It  is  hardly  necessary  to  say,  per- 
haps, that  the  whole  question  of 
clothing,  especially  for  young  people, 
depends  on  the  relation  between  the 
conducting  powers  of  various  sub- 
stances used  for  clothing.  In  this 
matter  the  sense  of  heat  gives  more 
trustworthy  information  than  the 
thermometer,  clothes  which  seem  to 
be  of  the  same  temperature  if  tested 
by  the  thermometer  affording  very 
different  degrees  of  protection 
against  the  loss  or  the  too  rapid  ac- 
cession of  heat. 

In  passing,  I may  note  here  an 
important  consideration  as  to  the 
clothing  proper  for  children.  In 
their  case  as  in  the  case  of  grown 
folk  the  sense  of  heat  gives  the  best 
information  as  to  what  is  really  de- 
sirable in  the  way  of  clothing.  But 
grown  people  are  apt  to  forget  the 
experiences  of  their  childhood,  and  to 
decide  what  is  best  for  children  from 
their  own  ideas  as  to  what  ought  to 
be  best.  A child  complains  of  cold 
or  of  heat  sooner  than  a grown  per- 
son ; but  much  less  attention  is  paid 
to  the  complaints  of  children  on  such 
matters  than  to  our  own  slightest  sug- 
gestions of  personal  discomfort.  And 
children  are  much  less  carefully 
guarded  against  heat  and  cold  than 
grown  persons  guard  themselves. 
The  idea  seems  to  be  that  children 
can  stand  any  changes  of  tempera- 
ture ; though,  oddly  enough,  children’s 
own  idea  (which  is  really  not  very  far 
from  the  truth)  that  they  can  stand 
anything  in  the  way  of  rich  and  indi- 
gestible eating,  is  not  much  considered 
by  older  persons.  Now,  when  a child 
shows  by  its  words  or  actions  that  it 
suffers  sooner  from  changes  of  tem- 
perature than  grown  people  do,  it  in 
reality  expresses  its  sense  of  an  im- 
portant truth.  A child  cools  and 


6 


ILLUSIONS  OF  THE  SENSES  : 


warms  more  quick-ly  than  a man  ; for 
precisely  the  same  reason  that  a small 
cinder  cools  more  quickly  than  a large 
one,  or  that  a small  fire  burns  out 
more  quickly  than  a large  furnace. 
Compare  the  case  of  a child  three 
feet  high  with  that  of  a man  six  feet 
high.  Neglecting  slight  differences 
of  build,  the  man  is  about  eight  times 
as  large  as  the  child,  or  contains  eight 
times  as  much  matter.  But  the  sur- 
face of  the  man  is  not  eight  times  as 
large  as  the  surface  of  the  child  ; it  is 
only  four  times  as  large.  Thus  sup- 
posing the  man  and  the  child  to  come 
out  of  a warm  room  into  the  cold 
outer  air,  being  both  at  the  same  tem- 
perature, the  man  has  eight  times  as 
much  heat  to  part  with  as  the  child 
has  ; but  he  only  parts  with  four  times 
as  much  heat,  moment  by  moment,  if 
he  and  the  child  are  similarly  clothed. 
Thus  the  child’s  loss  of  heat,  moment 
by  moment,  though  only  one-fourth  of 
the  man’s  loss  of  heat,  bears  twice  as 
great  a ratio  to  the  child’s  total  supply 
of  heat.  The  child  will  cool  as  much 
in  one  minute  as  the  man  cools  in  two 
minutes,  or  in  half-an-hour  as  the  man 
cools  in  an  hour.  If  the  weather  out- 
side is  so  cold  that  the  man  would 
suffer  serious  injury  to  his  health  after 
an  hour’s  exposure  to  it,  the  child  will 
suffer  at  least  an  equal  injury  in  half- 
an-hour.  In  reality,  of  course,  the 
child  will  suffer  a greater  injury ; be- 
cause apart  from  his  more  rapid  loss 
of  heat,  the  child’s  flesh  is  more  ten- 
der and  necessarily  suffers  more  from 
a given  loss  of  temperature.  Similar 
remarks  apply  to  increase  of  heat, 
which  may  be  just  as  mischievous  as 
access  of  cold.  Yet  we  are  too  apt 
to  clothe  children  with  total  disregard 
to  the  circumstances  that  they  require 
to  be  protected  much  more  carefully 
than  their  elders  against  rapid  changes 
of  temperature.  Apart  from  all  ques- 
tions of  propriety,  a man  would  not 
care  even  on  a fairly  warm  spring  day 
to  go  about  with  his  arms  and  legs 
bare  for  any  length  of  time ; for  he 
would  feel  uncomfortably  cool : chil- 
dren suffer  twice  as  much  on  such  a 
day  from  undue  exposure  to  the  air ; 


yet  many  foolish  folk  think  nothing  of 
exposing  the  delicate  limbs  of  children 
to  the  cold  of  winter  without  protec- 
tion. They  imagine  that  the  numb- 
ness and  insensibility  which  really 
indicate  the  mischievous  effects  of  the 
cold,  and  may  permanently  affect  the 
the  child’s  constitution,  are  signs  of 
hardening ; and  because  only  the 
hardier  survive  this  cruel  treatment 
they  imagine  that  those  hardy  sur- 
vivors owe  the  strength  which  enabled 
them  to  survive,  to  the  harsh  exposures 
by  which  that  strength  was  danger- 
ously taxed  and  perhaps  in  large 
measure  sapped. 

It  is,  however,  the  sense  of  sight 
which  has  most  thoroughly  deceived 
the  student  of  science,  almost  justify- 
ing Professor  Le  Conte’s  statement 
that  no  evidence  is  more  misleading 
and  fallacious  than  the  evidence  of 
the  senses.  So  far  from  seeing  being 
believing,  one  recognizes  that  often 
we  see  an  object  wrongly  tinted, 
wrongly  illuminated,  wrongly  shaped, 
besides  that  fault  of  wrong  apparent 
size  which  we  might  expect  to  recog- 
nize in  the  case  of  a sense  like  sight 
(which  gives  no  direct  evidence  as  to 
distance). 

Taking  this  last  defect  of  sight-evi- 
dence first,  we  note  that  the  eye-sight 
cannot  really  be  said  to  delude  us 
when  it  seems  to  tell  us  that — for  ex- 
ample— the  moon  is  as  large  as  the 
sun.  All  that  sight  really  tells  us  is 
that  the  sun  and  the  moon  occupy 
fields  of  view  of  the  same  apparent 
size.  This,  of  course,  is  correct  in- 
formation as  far  as  it  goes,  and  the 
sense  of  sight  cannot  go  further.  But 
the  sense  of  sight  conveys  false  ideas 
to  the  mind,  sometimes  even  about  ap- 
parent size. 

Perhaps  the  most  remarkable  case 
of  the  kind — at  any  rate  the  most  fa- 
miliar— is  the  apparent  increase  of 
the  sun  and  moon  in  size  as  they 
approach  the  horizon.  Singularly 
enough, Professor  Le  Conte  does  not 
regard  this  as  an  optical  illusion ; 
“ the  visual  angle  being  in  both  cases 
precisely  the  same,  the  size  of  the  im- 
age on  the  retina  must  have  been  the 


AND  OTHER  ESSAYS. 


7 


same.”  But  one  might  with  equal 
reason  say  that  none  of  the  illusions 
relating  to  touch  or  heat  are  really  il- 
lusions, seeing  that  the  actual  effects 
produced  on  the  nerves  of  touch  cor- 
respond with  the  actual  shapes  or 
temperatures  of  the  objects  felt.  In 
every  case  of  sense  illusion  the  nerves 
give  correct  information,  it  is  the  in- 
terpretation of  the  information  which 
is  incorrect. 

The  apparent  largeness  of  the  moon 
near  the  horizon  is  of  course  a real  il- 
lusion. It  is  often  elaborately  ex- 
plained as  due  to  the  magnifying 
power  of  the  layers  of  air  through 
which  the  moon  is  viewed.  In  the 
“ Wide  Wide  World  ” the  overwhelm- 
ingly wise  John  Marchmont  explains 
the  matter  thus  to  Ellen  Montgomery 
(I  hope  my  recollection  of  the  names 
is  trustworthy,  but  the  book  came  out 
a long  while  ago,  and  I have  not  seen 
it  since  its  first  appearance).  But  the 
moon  is  not  magnified  at  all  in  that 
sense.  She  does  not  occupy  a larger 
space  in  the  visual  field.  Nay  she 
looks  rather  smaller  when  near  the 
horizon,  being  then  nearly  4,000  miles 
nearer  to  us  than  when  overhead.  It 
is  easy  to  show  this ; and  in  passing 
I cannot  too  earnestly  recommend 
those  who  wish  to  form  correct  ideas 
about  the  apparent  sizes,  shapes,  posi- 
tions, and  movements  of  the  heavenly 
bodies,  to  test  such  matters  in  simple 
ways  such  as  I am  about  to  suggest  in 
the  moon’s  case.  Cut  out  in  card  a 
circle  exactly  half  an  inch  in  diame- 
ter, leaving  a projecting  piece  of  card 
outside  some  part  of  the  rim.  Then 
take  a straight  rod  about  54  inches 
long,  and  with  a tack  through  the  pro- 
jecting piece  fasten  the  disc  at  one 
end  of  the  rod,  so  that  the  whole  disc 
is  visible  from  the  other  end.  Now  it 
will  be  found  that  if  the  rod  be  di- 
rected toward  the  moon,  the  disc  of 
card  at  the  end  furthest  from  the  eye, 
will  just  hide  the  moon  from  an  eye 
placed  at  the  nearest  end.  Whether 
the  moon  is  high  up  in  the  sky  or  close 
to  the  horizon  the  same  thing  hap- 
pens. The  moon  looks  just  as  large 
high  up  as  she  does  low  down,  on  any 


given  night.  Of  course,  as  the  moon’s 
path  round  the  earth  is  not  quite  cir- 
cular there  is  a change  in  the  moon’s 
apparent  size  in  the  course  of  each 
lunar  month, — a change  which  the 
method  of  measurement  just  described 
will  serve  very  well — rough  though  it 
is — to  indicate.  Just  as  the  sun  va- 
ries in  apparent  diameter  as  the  year 
progresses,  his  diameter  on  January  1, 
bearing  to  his  diameter  on  July  1 the 
ratio  31  to  30,  so  the  moon  varies  as 
the  month  progresses,  and  in  greater 
degree.  But  look  at  the  moon  from 
one  end  of  the  rod  when  she  is  rising 
and  you  will  find  the  card  disc  at  the 
other  end  cover  her  either  exactly  or 
very  nearly,  and  when  she  is  at  her 
highest  on  the  same  night  you  will 
find  her  as  exactly  or  as  nearly  cov- 
ered by  the  card  disc  the  rod  being 
directed  in  the  same  way  toward  her, 
and  the  disc  viewed  by  an  eye  placed 
at  the  other  end  of  the  rod. 

Here  then  is  an  optical  illusion  by 
which  the  idea  is  conveyed  that  the 
moon  is  larger  when  low  down  than 
she  is  when  high  above  the  horizon, 
though  in  reality  occupying  as  large 
(nay,  even  a slightly  larger)  portion 
of  the  visual  field.  It  is  the  same 
with  the  sun,  and  the  same  also  with 
any  one  of  the  familiar  star  groups 
which  pass  from  close  by  the  horizon 
to  a great  distance  above  it.  How  is 
this  deception  to  be  explained  ? 

The  increase  of  the  moon’s  size 
near  the  horizon  has  been  attributed 
to  the  circumstance  that  when  she  is 
low  down  we  can  compare  her  appar- 
ent size  with  that  of  known  objects 
near  the  horizon,  and  seeing  that  she 
looks  larger  than  many  objects  which 
are  known  to  be  really  large,  as  trees, 
houses,  and  so  forth,  we  can  judge 
that  she  is  larger  than  we  had  (uncon- 
sciously) supposed  her  to  be  when 
high  up.  But  I cannot  see  that  there 
is  any  force  in  this  explanation.  It  is 
true  that  if  the  moon  when  low  down 
is  looked  at  through  a tube  of  any 
sort,  hiding  surrounding  objects,  she 
no  longer  appears  so  large.  But  this 
does  not  prove  that  the  surrounding 
objects  make  her  look  larger,  other 


8 


ILLUSIONS  OF  THE  SENSES: 


relations  besides  those  depending  on 
the  appearance  of  surrounding  ob- 
jects are  concealed  by  the  tube  ; and 
amongst  them  that  which  is,  I take  it, 
the  true  explanation  of  the  moon’s 
apparent  increase  of  size. 

The  fact  is  that  the  increase  in  the 
apparent  size  of  the  moon  and  other 
celestial  objects  as  they  draw  nearer 
to  the  horizon  is  connected  with  a 
much  wider  illusion  affecting  the  ap- 
parent dome-shape  of  the  sky  over 
our  heads. 

Of  course  when  we  look  at  a cloud- 
laden sky  we  perceive  at  once  that 
our  range  of  view  is  not  limited  by 
the  interior  of  a hemispherical  surface. 
The  region  above  our  heads  seems 
shaped  like  the  interior  of  a very  much 
flattened  dome,  the  horizon  being 
much  farther  away  than  the  sky  di- 
rectly overhead.  When  the  sky  is 
clear  the  dome  above  us  seems  more 
arched,  but  it  never  appears  like  a 
true  hemisphere.  Probably  to  ordi- 
nary eye-sight  the  star-strewn  sky  on  a 
clear  night  appears  shaped  as  though 
the  part  directly  overhead  were  at 
only  about  one-quarter  the  distance 
of  the  part  near  the  horizon.  But  of 
course  the  range  of  the  moon’s  path 
around  any  observer  on  earth  is  such 
that  her  distance  varies  very  slightly, 
as  if  in  fact  she. always  moved  on  the 
inner  surface  of  a sphere  having  the 
observer  at  its  center.  To  one  then 
who  entertains  unconsciously  the  er- 
roneous notion  that  the  sky  is  arched 
over  the  earth,  in  such  sort  that  the 
region  overhead  lies  at  about  a fourth 
the  distance  of  the  horizon,  the  expec- 
tation unconsciously  arises  that  when 
the  moon  is  close  to  the  horizon  she 
will  present  a smaller  disc  than  when 
she  is  high  up  in  the  sky.  As  a mat- 
ter of  fact,  she  looks  about  as  large 
(not  quite,  but  very  nearly),  that  is, 
she  subtends  the  same  visual  angle ; 
but  the  effect  of  her  looking  so  much 
larger  than  had  been  unconsciously  ex- 
pected, is  to  suggest  that  she  is  really 
larger  than  when  high  above  the  hori- 
zon. We  apply  to  her  the  same  un- 
conscious reasoning  by  which  we  rec- 
ognize that  a tree  on  the  horizon 


which  subtends  the  same  apparent 
angle  as  a tree  close  by  is  much  the 
larger  of  the  two.  Having  in  reality 
no  means  of  estimating  the  real  size 
of  the  moon,  we  make  its  apparent  po- 
sition guide  us  to  an  idea  of  its  size, 
and  as  it  seems — being  near  the  hori- 
zon— much . farther  away  than  when 
high,  yet  looks  no  smaller,  we  judge 
it  to  be  really  larger. 

I had  a singular  example  recently 
of  the  effect  of  position  in  forcing  an 
illusory  idea  on  the  mind,  even  when 
the  truth  was  well  and  even  familiarly 
known.  I was  in  the  streets  of 
Charleston  (South  Carolina)  engaged 
in  conversation,  but  my  eyes  directed 
toward  the  upper  ridge  of  a project- 
ing balcony.  While  I talked,  I saw 
what  looked  like  a bird’s  head  rising 
just  beyond  the  ridge,  and  in  a 
moment  or  two  there  was  the  creat- 
ure, a tiny  but  very  oddly  shaped 
bird  apparently  fluttering  above  the 
balcony.  It  looked  no  larger  than  a 
humming-bird.  Now  I knew  at  once 
that  I was  not  looking  at  a bird,  be- 
cause I could  see  that  the  object  had 
a pendent  waving  tail  such  as  no  bird 
ever  had.  I knew  as  well  that  it  was 
not  a small  bird  close  by,  but  a Chi- 
nese kite  at  a considerable  distance, 
as  I knew  that  it  was  day;  yet  be- 
cause my  mind  had  started  with  the 
wrong  idea  that  the  object  was  just 
above  the  balcony,  I could  not  for 
several  seconds  shake  off  the  absurd 
impression  that  there  was  a miniature 
bird-kite  fluttering  above  a straight 
stone  ridge  where  assuredly  was  no 
string  attached  to  it.  I take  it  that 
the  deception  by  which,  against  my 
own  knowledge,  I was  for  awhile 
made  to  imagine  the  kite  much  smaller 
than  it  really  was,  because  it  seemed 
much  nearer  than  such  an  object  is 
usually  seen,  was  precisely  akin  to 
the  illusion  by  which,  against  our  own 
knowledge  we  are  led  to  imagine  the 
moon  much  enlarged  near  the  horizon 
because  it  there  seems  much  farther 
away  than  as  seen  high  up  toward 
the  zenith. 

The  illusion  as  to  the  shape  of  the 
heavens  around  us  and  the  sky  above 


AND  OTHER  ESSAYS. 


us  (not  the  same  thing  be  it  noticed) 
is  one  which  deceives  us  all  the  time, 
— at  least  I have  never  met  with  any- 
one who  has  been  able  to  correct 
either  form  of  illusion.  We  conceive 
the  heavenly  bodies  overhead  to  be 
nearer  to  us  than  those  near  the  hori- 
zon, the  heavenly  concave  being  pre- 
sented as  somewhat  flattened  over- 
head : and  on  the  other  hand  a cloud- 
covered  sky  appears  arched  overhead 
instead  of  having  a flat  horizontal  sur- 
face. Do  what  we  will  we  cannot 
force  the  mind  to  feel  either  that  the 
stars  overhead  are  no  nearer  than 
those  by  the  horizon,  or  that  the 
clouds  near  the  horizon  are  as  much 
farther  away  than  those  overhead,  as 
they  really  are.  The  clouds  low  down 
seem  somewhat  farther  away  than 
those  above  our  heads, — perhaps  four 
or  five  times  farther  : but  in  reality 
they  are  usually  twenty  or  thirty  t’imes 
farther  from  us.  But  the  mind  refuses 
to  present  to  us  the  much  greater  dis- 
tance of  those  low-lying  clouds. 

It  may  be  said,  indeed,  that  the  mind 
is  unable  to  conceive  a spherical  sur- 
face, either  convex  or  concave,  beyond 
a certain  size,  which  differs  probably 
in  the  case  of  each  person,  differs  cer- 
tainly as  life  advances,  and  is  far 
short  of  the  dimensions  of  any  one  of 
the  celestial  globes,  except  possibly 
the  moons  of  Mars.  It  maybe  that  if 
living  in  Fear  or  Terror  (as  the  attend- 
ants on  Mars  have  been  called)  we 
might  recognize  the  rotundity  of  the 
surface  of  our  home,  seeing  that  prob- 
ably neither  of  these  moons  has  a 
diameter  of  more  than  twenty  miles. 
But  it  is  certain  that  no  one  can  ap- 
preciate the  rotundity  of  our  earth,  in 
such  sort  that  not  merely  the  circum- 
stance that  the  globe  is  rotund  is 
recognized,  but  the  dimensions  of  the 
globe  of  which  the  region  we  see  at 
any  moment  is  a part.  The  best 
proof  of  this  is  found  in  the  fact  that 
the  earth’s  surface  appears  concave  so 
soon  as  we  see  any  very  large  extent 
of  it.  As  seen  from  a balloon,  for  in- 
stance, the  earth  seems  like  a gigantic 
basin,  the  mind  not  being  able  to  take 
in  the  real  truth  that  the  earth  is  too 


large  for  the  horizon  to  dip  recogniza- 
bly even  when  the  eye  is  two  or  three 
miles  above  the  earth’s  surface.  If 
one  could  pass  away  from  the  earth 
to  distances  so  great  that  she  would 
be  visible  as  a globe,  we  should  still 
be  unable  to  form  any  idea  of  her 
size, — just  as  now  the  sun,  moon, 
planets,  and  stars  tell  the  eye  nothing 
of  their  real  dimensions. 

A curious  question  here  suggests 
itself : — Supposing  one  could  pass 
away  from  the  earth’s  surface  steadily 
till  she  appeared  like  a globe,  what 
would  be  the  changes  her  aspect  would 
undergo  ? She  would  certainly  appear 
concave  until  a great  height  had  been 
attained  ; and  as  certainly  she  would 
eventually  appear  a globe  as  the  sun 
and  moon  do  : but  in  what  way,  I 
wonder,  would  the  apparently  concave 
surface  pass  to  a manifestly  convex 
surface  ? Would  this  happen  gradu- 
ally, or  would  the  conviction  suddenly 
force  itself  on  the  mind  that  the  sur- 
face which  had  appeared  concave  was 
really  convex?  There  is  a familiar 
illusion  which  illustrates  such  a change 
as  this,  and  seems  to  suggest  that  the 
change  of  appearance  would  be  sud- 
den. If  you  look  through  a lens,  in- 
verting the  object  seen,  at  a convex 
surface,  it  appears  to  be  concave  (a 
coin  under  the  same  conditions,  ap- 
pears to  have  all  the  parts  which  "are 
really  in  relief  depressed)  because  the 
mind  recognizes  the  evidence  given 
by  the  shadows  without  being  con- 
scious that  this  evidence  has  been  in- 
verted by  the  action  of  the  lens.  Now 
if,  while  the  convex  surface  thus  ap- 
pears concave  you  introduce  into  the 
field  of  view  some  object  which  shows 
which  way  the  shadows  really  fall — 
as  an  upright  pin,  or  the  like — you 
find  the  seeming  concavity  at  once 
changed  to  convexity,  the  mind  being 
unable  to  note  how  the  change  takes 
place,  so  rapid  is  it.  Possibly  this 
would  be  the  way  in  which  the  seem- 
ing concavity  of  the  earth  would 
change  to  convexity,  as  we  passed 
away  to  the  distances  at  which  the 
earth  would  appear  like  a celestial 
orb. 


10 


ILLUSIONS  OF  THE  SENSES: 


Illusions  affecting  our  ideas  about 
the  apparent  brightness  of  objects  are 
even  more  deceptive  than  those  affect- 
ing form.  The  French  astronomer 
Chacornac  wrote  an  article  once  in 
explanation  of  the  superior  brightness 
of  the  discs  of  Jupiter  and  Saturn  near 
the  edge.  The  explanation  was  in- 
genious, and  would  have  perhaps 
thrown  light  on  the  nature  and  con- 
dition of  the  giant  planets,  if  it  had 
only  chanced  that  the  superior  bright- 
ness which  he  explained  had  a real 
existence.  As  a matter  of  fact,  how- 
ever, so  far  are  the  parts  of  Jupiter 
and  Saturn  near  the  edge  of  their 
discs  from  being  brighter  than  the 
parts  near  the  middle  that  the  precise 
reverse  is  the  case,  and  in  quite  a 
marked  degree.  I was  first  led  to 
observe  this  by  theoretical  considera- 
tions, which  seemed  to  suggest  that 
the  light  from  the  parts  of  Jupiter 
near  the  edge  ought  to  be  very  much 
less  than  the  light  from  the  middle  of 
the  planet’s  disc.  It  so  chanced  that 
just  as  I had  satisfactorily  reasoned 
this  out,  I came  across  Chacornac’s 
article  explaining  why  the  edge  is  so 
much  and  so  obviously  brighter  than 
the  middle.  This  led  me  to  inquire 
whether  the  case  really  was  as  he 
supposed  or  not.  Now,  to  those  who 
have  paid  attention  to  the  phenomena 
of  Jupiter’s  satellites,  many  circum- 
stances are  knowrn  which  show  that 
the  edge  of  Jupiter’s  disc  must  be 
darker  than  the  middle.  For  exam- 
ple, a satellite  looks  light  when  near 
the  edge,  dark  when  on  the  middle  of 
the  disc ; or  else  (which  proves  the 
same  thing)  a satellite  is  scarcely  vis- 
ible near  the  edge,  being  so  nearly  of 
the  same  lustre  as  the  planet,  but  as 
it  passes  on  to  the  brighter  central 
parts  of  the  disc  it  becomes  a dark 
spot,  sometimes  even  looking  as  dark 
as  its  own  shadow  close  alongside. 
All  this  in  reality  proves  that  the  edge 
is  darker  than  the  middle  of  the  disc  ; 
yet  it  looks  decidedly  brighter.  I 
suggested,  therefore,  to  a friend  who 
was  making  experiments  on  the  lumi- 
nosity of  various  celestial  bodies,  that 
he  should  test  this  matter  by  deter- 


mining whether  the  parts  of  Jupiter’s 
disc  near  the  edge  or  the  parts  near 
the  middle  remained  longest  visible 
when  the  light  of  the  planet  was  grad- 
ually extinguished  by  means  of  a neu- 
tral-tinted darkening  glass  (graduated 
from  almost  complete  transparency  at 
one  hand  to  almost  complete  opacity 
at  the  other).  The  result  was  deci- 
sive, and  exactly  contrary  to  the  evi- 
dence of  the  eyes.  The  parts  which 
to  the  eye  seemed  so  obviously  the 
brightest  were  the  first  to  yield  to  the 
absorption  of  the  light,  the  parts  which 
looked  least  bright  remained  visible 
longest.  Of  course,  the  illusion  is 
easily  explained.  By  contrast  with 
the  black  background  of  the  sky  the 
parts  near  the  edge  of  Jupiter  and 
Saturn  look  brighter  than  they  really 
are. 

A noteworthy  illusion  was  passingly 
indicated  in  what  I have  just  de- 
scribed. I have  said  that  a satellite 
sometimes  looks  as  dark  as  its  shadow 
close  alongside.  Now  the  shadows 
of  the  satellites  look  black  ; but  the 
satellite  itself  cannot  be  black.  We 
see  then  that  the  appearance  of  black- 
ness does  not  necessarily  imply  real 
blackness.  So  the  spots  on  the  sun 
look  black  near  the  middle  of  the 
umbra ; yet  they  cannot  be  really  black 
there  ; and  indeed  when  examined  so 
that  the  effect  of  contrast  is  avoided 
they  are  found  to  emit  a considerable 
amount  of  light.  Another  case  of 
illusion  may  be  noticed  in  total 
eclipses  of  the  sun.  Here  the  body 
of  the  moon  looks  black ; yet  in  reality 
it  is  lit  up  at  least  twelve  times  as 
brightly  as  a landscape  under  full 
moonlight,  for  the  earth  is  at  the  time 
of  solar  eclipse  shining  full  upon  the 
half  of  the  moon  turned  earthwards, 
and  her  disc  is  13^  times  as  large 
as  the  moon’s  appears  to  us.  To  my 
mind,  one  of  ttfe  best  proofs  of  the 
brightness  of  the  solar  corona,  is  found 
in  the  seeming  blackness  of  the  moon’s 
disc  during  total  solar  eclipse. 

But  the  seeming  whiteness  of  the 
moon’s  disc  when  she  is  full  is  quite 
as  much  an  illusion  as  its  seeming 
blackness  when  she  is  between  the 


AND  OTHER  ESSAYS. 


11 


sun  and  us.  For  the  moon  is  not 
really  white.  She  is  much  more 
nearly  black.  Regarding  ioo  as  rep- 
resenting perfect  whiteness,  the  aver- 
age tint  of  the  moon's  surface  would 
be  represented  by  only  17.  Probably 
the  darker  portions,  which,  when  she 
is  full  look  only  slightly  less  white 
than  the  rest,  are  as  dark  as  our  por- 
phyries and  syenites. 

Another  remarkable  illusion  affect- 
ing brightness  is  that  which  has  de- 
ceived several  students  of  the  moon 
in  the  case  of  the  floor  of  the  lunar 
crater,  Plato.  This  broad  expanse 
•seems  to  grow  darker  as  the  sun  rises 
higher  above  its  level ; but  this  is  a 
pure  illusion,  due  to  the  gradual  dim- 
inution of  the  black  shadows  of  the 
surrounding  mountains.  By  contrast 
with  these  shadows  the  floor  looks 
lighter  than  it  really  is  ; as  they  dimin- 
ish it  seems  to  grow  darker ; when 
they  disappear  altogether  it  looks 
darkest ; and  as  they  gradually  grow 
larger  in  the  afternoon  and  evening  of 
the  long  lunar  day  there,  the  floor 
seems  to  get  light  again.  As  a matter 
of  fact  the  floor  gets  brighter  as  the 
sun  rises  higher  above  its  level,  and 
darkens  again  as  the  sun  gradually 
nears  the  horizon  of  Plato. 

The  illusions  affecting  motion  are 
too  remarkable  and  too  numerous  to 
be  dealt  with  properly  in  the  small 
space  remaining  to  me  here.  I may, 
perhaps,  consider  them  hereafter  in  a 
separate  short  essay. 


ANIMALS  OF  THE  PRESENT 
AND  THE  PAST. 

Mr.  Grant  Allen  (for  to  his  facile 
pen  the  article  on  “ Big  Animals,”  in 
a recent  number  of  the  Cornhill  Mag- 
azine may  safely  be  attributed),  has 
done  good  service  in  showing  how 
unfounded  are  two  very  prevalent 
ideas  respecting  the  past  of  this  earth 
on  which  we  live — viz.,  first,  the  idea 
that  the  various  races  of  animals  which 
appear  in  the  geologic  record  all  ex- 
isted at  some  remote  time  (“  in  those 


days,”  meaning  some  imaginary  epoch 
specially  belonging  to  geological 
science) ; and  secondly,  the  idea  that 
in  past  ages  the  animals  existing  on 
the  earth  were  very  much  larger  than 
those  now  known. 

As  regards  the  first  idea,  relating  to 
geological  time,  the  Pleistocene  age  is 
really  as  yesterday  in  the  past  history 
of  our  earth,  and  the  Pliocene  as  the 
day  before  yesterday.  The  mammoth 
in  the  northern  hemisphere,  and  the 
moa  in  the  southern,  are  creatures  of 
yesterday,  while  the  mastodon,  on  the 
same  time  scale,  can  be  set  no  further 
back  than  the  last  generation  or  so. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  “ monstrous  ” 
marine  saurians  of  the  Jurassic  era 
are  of  remote  antiquity.  Mr.  Allen 
expresses  the  relation,  in  point  of 
time,  neatly,  when  he  says  that  “ to 
compare  the  relative  lapses  of  time 
with  human  chronology,  the  mastodon 
stands  to  our  own  fauna  as  Beau 
Brummel  stands  to  the  modern 
masher,  while  the  saurians  stand  to  it 
as  the  Egyptian  and  Assyrian  warriors 
stand  to  Lord  Wolseley  and  the  fol- 
lowers of  the  Mahdi.”  In  fact,  the 
mind,  as  regards  its  power  of  dealing 
with  time-intervals,  is  lost  in  the  pres- 
ence of  the  vastness  of  the  era  to 
which  our  own  period  belongs  as  com- 
pared with  the  minute  span  over 
which  history  extends  its  survey — is 
lost,  yet  once  more,  in  comparing 
even  with  the  vastness  of  the  glacial 
period  the  seemingly  immeasurable 
duration  of  the  Pliocene  and  its  still 
longer  predecessor  the  Miocene,  and, 
endeavoring  to  look  beyond  these  in- 
to still  remoter  depths  of  past  time,  is 
simply  appalled.  The  Eocene  was 
so  long-lasting,  that  the  sequent  eras, 
which  with  it  make  up  the  Tertiary 
period,  seem  by  comparison  as  seconds 
compared  with  hours.  But  the  whole 
duration  of  the  Tertiary  period  is  in- 
significant compared  with  the  incon- 
ceivable length  of  the  Secondary  pe- 
riod, while  the  Secondary  period,  in 
turn,  is  short  compared  with  the  Pri- 
mary period,  and  even  this  tells  us 
only  of  the  close  of  a yet  more  tre- 
mendous time-interval,  during  which 


U,  OF  ILL  US. 


12 


ILLUSIONS  OF  THE  SENSES  : 


no  trace  was  left  of  the  earth’s  prog- 
ress to  the  world  form,  any  more  than 
the  sea  leaves  any.  record  of  the  prog- 
ress of  the  storms  which  sweep  over 
its  vast  surface. 

Truly  it  is  amazing  to  consider 
now,  when  these  vast  periods  of  time 
have  taken  their  place  among  the 
recognized  and  assured  teachings  of 
the  great  earth  volume,  that  but  half 
a century  or  so  ago  a struggle  was 
still  maintained  to  reduce  our  estimate 
of  the  earth’s  past  existence  to  a few 
thousands  of  years,  while  multitudes 
of  well-meaning  persons  imagined 
that  an  eternity  of  future  happiness 
or  misery  depended  on  each  man’s  re- 
jection or  acceptance  of  the  doc- 
trine which  God’s  work,  the  earth, 
assuredly  teaches.  Yet,  strangely 
enough,  the  school  of  those  who 
maintained  that  hopeless  struggle  is 
not  ashamed  even  now  to  denounce 
the  followers  of  the  scientific  school 
for  accepting  the  obvious  meaning 
of  these  new  pages  of  that  great  vol- 
ume which  have  since  been  turned 
over. 

With  regard  to  the  dimensions  of 
the  modern  inhabitants  of  the  earth, 
we  must  remember  that  to  every  era 
of  the  earth’s  history  a special  kind 
of  development  has  been  specially 
appropriate.  It  is  certain  that  the 
great  land  monsters  of  the  Jurassic 
age  could  not  exist  now.  For  while 
their  numbers  must  have  always  been 
limited,  even  when  surrounding  con- 
ditions favored  their  existence,  the 
powers  of  the  human  race  at  the 
present  time  would  be  fatal  to  the 
existence  of  these  unwieldy  monsters. 
The  monstrous  eft,  which  of  old  was 
lord  and  master  of  earth,  might  main- 
tain, at  least  for  awhile,  the  position 
of  lord  and  monarch  still,  were  it  not 
for  man.  But  with  man  in  the  arena 
against  the  Atlantosaurus,  one  or  other 
would  have  to  give  way,  and  it  would 
not  be  man.  The  mammals  of  the 
Pliocene  age  were  not  so  much 
greater  than  their  modern  represent- 
atives that  we  need  consider  them 
specially.  And  assuredly  when  we 
turn  to  the  sea-monsters  of  our  own 


time  we  need  not  fear  comparison 
with  even  the  mightiest  monsters  of 
past  geological  ages.  The  Rorqual 
attains  sometimes  to  a length  of  fully 
one  hundred  feet,  the  razor-back 
whale  sometimes  measures  seventy 
feet,  and  there  are  other  cetaceans 
not  much  inferior  in  size.  As  to  the 
dimensions  of  sharks,  some  doubt 
appears  to  exist.  Considering  the 
nature  of  the  creature,  and  that  men 
have  never  found  it  desirable  to  hunt 
for  sharks  as  they  have  for  wrhales 
(possibly  if  they  had  they  would  have 
made  but  unsatisfactory  progress  in 
the  art  of  shark-hunting),  it  would  be 
absurd  to  suppose  that  we  have  be- 
come acquainted  even  with  the  larg- 
est existing  varieties,  far  less  wfith 
the  largest  individual  specimens.  To 
give  an  idea  of  the  state  of  things  in 
regard  to  sharks,  I may  record  an 
experience  of  my  own.  In  the  voy- 
age from  Auckland,  N.  Z.,  to  Hono- 
lulu, the  City  of  Sydney  was  tempo- 
rarily disabled  by  the  breaking  of 
a crank-pin.  Up  to  the  day  when 
this  accident  occurred,  not  one  among 
the  crew  or  passengers  had  seen  a 
single  shark  of  any  kind,  though  the 
passengers  certainly  passed  a good 
half  of  their  time  looking  at  the 
waters  around  them.  But  scarcely 
had  we  been  at  rest  a quarter  of  an 
hour  before  the  sea  all  around  our 
disabled  ship  was  literally  swarming 
with  sharks.  When  I learn,  there- 
fore, that  the  naturalists  of  the  Chal- 
lenger  expedition  have  dredged  up  in 
numbers  from  the  ooze  of  the  Pacific 
shark  teeth  five  inches  long  by  four 
wide,  which  would  indicate  that  the 
sharks  to  which  these  teeth  belonged 
were  a hundred  feet  long,  I feel  no 
doubt  that  sharks  of  these  dimen- 
sions are  still  in  existence.  Dr. 
Gunter,  of  the  British  Museum, 
writes,  it  is  true,  that  “ as  we  have 
no  record  of  living  individuals  of  that 
bulk,  the  gigantic  species  to  which 
the  teeth  belonged  must  probably 
have  become  extinct  within  a com- 
paratively recent  period.”  And  Mr. 
Grant  Allen  speaks  of  him  as  a very 
cautious  naturalist  for  thus  avoid- 


AND  OTHER  ESSAYS. 


13 


ing  the  natural  conclusion  that  the 
species  is  not  extinct  at  all.  But  to 
my  mind  it  savors  of  much  greater 
daring  to  imagine  the  extinction  than 
the  existence  of  these  gigantic  carchar- 
odons.  We  know  of  nothing  which 
could  probably  have  led  to  the  ex- 
tinction of  monsters  such  as  these, 
which  would  have  all  their  own  way 
among  the  denizens  of  the  great  deep. 
Man  has  not  sought  their  destruction 
as  he  has  sought  the  destruction  of 
species  of  whales  which  nevertheless 
still  exist;  they  cannot  have  been 
attacked  and  destroyed  by  other 
species  of  fish,  or  even  conceivably 
deprived  of  the  means  of  living  by 
more  active  and  predaceous  creatures. 
That  they  should  die  out,  then,  seems 
altogether  unlikely ; whereas  it  is 
altogether  natural  that  they  should 
remain  unknown  amid  the  depths  of 
the  mighty  ocean,  for  they  would 
keep  to  the  great  deep,  avoiding  even 
an  approach  to  shallows,  nor  would 
they  be  apt  to  show  where  the  smaller 
and  more  numerous  orders  of  sharks 
are  seen. 

Albeit  I may  remark  that  Mr. 
Allen  seems  to  me  mistaken  in  as- 
suming that  the  monstrous  sharks  to 
whom  these  teeth  belonged  were 
as  large  as  any  sea  creatures  of  re- 
mote geological  eras.  I have  in  my 
possession  shark’s  teeth  collected  in 
the  neighborhood  of  Charleston,  S.  C., 
which  are  5)4  in.  long  by  4)4  in. 
broad,  and  in  the  Museum  of  Charles- 
ton they  have  shark’s  teeth  much 
larger  even  than  that. 

The  largest  calamaries  of  the  pres- 
ent time  are  certainly  larger  than  any 
of  those  whose  remains  exist  as  fos- 
sils. A cuttle  thrown  up  on  the 
shore  of  Newfoundland  was  80  ft. 
long. 

On  the  whole,  it  may  be  doubted 
whether  at  any  time  in  the  past  his- 
tory of  the  earth  the  average  size  of 
the  ten  largest  creatures  by  sea  and 
land  exceeded  the  average  size  of 
the  ten  largest  species  existing  at 
the  present  day. — Newcastle  Weekly 
Chronicle. 


LIFE  IN  OTHER  WORLDS. 

So  far  back  as  1869,  I had  begun 
to  regard  doubtfully  the  theory  that 
all  the  planets  are  the  abode  of  life. 
The  careful  study  of  the  planets  Jupi- 
ter and  Saturn  had  shown  that  any 
such  theory  regarding  these  planets  is 
altogether  untenable.  The  great  dif- 
ference between  them  and  the  mem- 
bers of  the  smaller  planetary  family  of 
which  our  earth  is  the  chief,  suggest- 
ed that  in  truth  the  major  planets  be- 
long to  another  order  of  orbs  alto- 
gether, and  that  we  have  as  much  or 
as  little  reason  for  comparing  them 
to  the  sun  as  for  comparing  them  to 
the  earth  on  which  we  live.  Never- 
theless, in  the  case  of  Venus  and 
Mars,  the  features  of  resemblance  to 
our  earth  predominate  over  those  of 
dissimilarity  ; and  it  was  natural  that, 
while  rejecting  the  theory  of  life  in 
Jupiter  or  Saturn  as  opposed  to  all 
the  available  evidence,  I should  still 
consider  the  theory  of  life  in  Mars  or 
Venus  as  at  least  plausible.  Ideas 
on  such  subjects  are  not  less 
tenacious  than  theories  on  matters 
more  strictly  scientific.  Not  only  so, 
but  the  bearing  of  newly-recognized 
facts  on  long-entertained  theories  is 
not  at  once  recognized  even  by  those 
most  careful  to  square  their  opin- 
ions according  to  the  evidence  they  are 
acquainted  with.  Again  and  again  it 
has  happened  that  students  of  science 
(in  which  term  I include  the  leaders 
of  scientific  opinions)  have  been  found 
recording  and  explaining  in  one 
chapter  some  newly-recognized  fact, 
while  in  another  chapter  they  have 
described  with  approval  some  old 
theory,  in  total  forgetfulness  of  the 
fact  that  with  the  new  discovery  the 
old  theory  has  become  altogether  un- 
tenable. Sometimes  the  incongruity 
is  not  recognized  until  it  has  been 
pointed  out  by  others.  Sometimes 
so  thoroughly  do  our  prepossessions 
become  “ bone  of  our  bone  and  flesh 
of  our  flesh ’’that  even  the  clearest 
reasoning  does  not  prevent  the  stu- 
dent of  science  from  combining  the 


14 


ILLUSIONS  OF  THE  SENSES: 


acceptance  of  a newly-discovered  fact 1 
with  continued  belief  in  a theory 
which  that  fact  entirely  disproves. 
Let  the  matter  be  explained  as  it  may, 
it  was  only  gradually  that  both  the 
Brewsterian  and  Whewellite  theories 
of  life  in  other  worlds  gave  place  in 
my  mind  to  a theory  in  one  sense 
intermediate  to  them,  in  another  sense 
opposed  to  both,  which  seems  to  ac- 
cord better  than  either  with  what  we 
know  about  our  own  earth,  about  the 
other  members  of  the  solar  system, 
and  about  other  suns  which  people 
space.  What  I now  propose  to  do  is 
to  present  this  theory  as  specially  il- 
lustrated by  the  two  planets  which 
now  adorn  our  skies  at  night,  and  by 
the  ruddy  but  at  present  invisible 
Mars. 

But  it  may  be  asked  at  the  outset, 
whether  the  question  of  life  in  other 
worlds  is  worthy  of  the  attention  thus 
directed  to  it.  Seeing  that  we  have 
not  and  can  never  have  positive 
knowledge  on  the  subject,  is  it  to  be 
regarded  as,  in  the  scientific  sense, 
worthy  of  discussion  at  all  ? Can  the 
astronomer  or  the  geologist,  the  phys- 
icist or  the  biologist,  know  more  on 
this  subject  than  those  who  have 
no  special  knowledge  of  astronomy, 
or  geology,  or  physics,  or  biology  ? 
The  astronomer  can  say  how  large 
such  and  such  a planet  is,  its  average 
density,  the  length  of  its  day  and  its 
year,  the  light-reflecting  qualities  of  its 
surface,  even  (with  the  physicists’  aid) 
the  nature  of  the  atmosphere  sur- 
rounding it,  and  so  on  ; the  geologists 
can  tell  much  about  the  past  history 
of  our  own  earth,  whence  we  may  in- 
fer the  variations  of  condition  which 
other  earths  in  the  universe  probably 
undergo  ; the  physicist,  besides  aid- 
ing the  astronomer  in  his  inquiries 
into  the  condition  of  other  orbs,  can 
determine  somewhat  respecting  the 
physical  requirements  of  living  creat- 
ures ; and  the  biologist  can  show  how 
the  races  inhabiting  our  earth  have 
gradually  become  modified  in  accord- 
ance with  the  varying  conditions  sur- 
rounding them,  how  certain  ill-adapt- 
ed races  have  died  out  while  well- 1 


adapted  races  have  thriven  and  multi- 
plied, and  how  matters  have  so  pro- 
ceeded that  during  the  whole  time 
since  life  began  upon  our  earth  there 
has  been  no  danger  of  the  disappear- 
ance of  any  of  the  leading  orders  of 
living  creatures.  But  no  astronomer, 
or  geologist,  or  physicist,  or  biologist, 
can  tell  us  anything  certain  about 
life  in  other  worlds.  If  a man  pos- 
sessed the  fullest  knowledge  of  all 
the  leading  branches  of  scientific  re- 
search, he  would  remain  perfectly 
ignorant  of  the  actual  state  of  affairs 
in  the  planets  even  of  our  own  system. 
His  ideas  about  other  worlds  must  still 
be  speculative ; and  the  most  igno- 
rant can  speculate  on  such  matters  as 
freely  as  the  most  learned.  Indeed, 
the  ignorant  can  speculate  a great 
deal  more  freely.  And  it  is  here,  pre- 
cisely, that  knowledge  has  the  ad- 
vantage. The  student  of  science 
feels  that  in  such  matters  he  must  be 
guided  by  the  analogies  which  have 
been  already  brought  to  his  knowl- 
edge. If  he  rejects  the  Brewsterian 
or  the  Whewellite  theory,  it  is  not  be- 
cause either  theory  is  a mere  specu- 
lation for  which  he  feels  free  to  sub- 
stitute a speculation  of  his  own  ; but 
because,  on  a careful  consideration 
of  the  facts,  he  finds  that  the  analo- 
gies on  which  both  theories  were  based 
were  either  insufficient,  or  were  not 
correctly  dealt  with,  and  that  other 
analogies,  or  these  when  rightly 
viewed,  point  to  a different  conclu- 
sion as  more  probable. 

Nor  need  we  be  concerned  by  the 
consideration  that  there  can  be  no 
scientific  value  in  any  conclusion  to 
which  we  may  be  led  on  the  subject  of 
life  in  other  worlds,  even  though  our 
method  of  reasoning  be  so  far  scien- 
tific that  the  argument  from  analogy 
is  correctiy  dealt  with.  If  we  look 
closely  into  the  matter,  we  shall  find 
that  as  respects  the  great  purposes 
for  which  science  is  studied,  it  is  as 
instructive  to  think  over  the  question 
of  life  in  other  worlds  as  to  reason 
about  matters  which  are  commonly 
regarded  as  purely  scientific.  It  is 
scientific  to  infer  from  observations. 


AND  OTHER  ESSAYS. 


15 


of  a planet  that  it  has  such  and  such  a 
diameter,  or  such  and  such  a mass ; 
and  thence  to  infer  that  its  surface 
contains  so  many  millions  of  square 
miles,  its  volumes  so  many  millions 
of  cubic  miles,  its  mass  so  many 
billions  or  trillions  of  tons  ; yet  these 
facts  are  not  impressive  in  themselves. 
It  is  only  when  we  consider  them  in 
connection  with  what  we  know  about 
our  own  earth  that  they  acquire  mean- 
ing, or,  at  least,  that  they  have  any 
real  interest  for  us.  For  then  alone 
do  we  recognize  their  bearing  on  the 
great  problem  which  underlies  all 
science, — the  question  of  the  mean- 
ing of  the  wonderful  machinery  at 
work  around  us ; machinery  of  which 
we  are  ourselves  a portion.* 

In  suggesting  views  respecting  Jupi- 
ter and  Mars  unlike  those  which  have 
been  commonly  received  with  favor, 
it  is  not  by  a»y  means  my  purpose, 
as  the  reader  might  anticipate,  to  de- 
part from  the  usual  course,  of  judging 
the  unknown  by  the  known.  Al- 
though that  course  is  fraught  with 
difficulties,  and  has  often  led  the 
student  of  science  astray,  it  is  in  such 
inquiries  as  the  present  the  proper, 
one  may  almost  say  the  only,  course. 
The  exception  I take  to  the  ordinary 
views  is  not  based  on  the  fact  that 
too  much  reliance  has  been  placed  on 
the  argument  from  analogy,  but  that 
the  argument  has  been  incorrectly 


* It  has  often  seemed  to  us  that  a descrip- 
tion, by  the  close  observer  Dickens,  of  the 
fancies  of  a brain  distempered  by  fever,  cor- 
responds with  feelings  which  the  student  of 
science  is  apt  to  experience  as  the  sense  of 
the  awful  mystery  of  the  universe  impresses 
itself  on  his  soul : — “ The  time  seemed  inter- 
minable. I compounded  impossible  exist- 
ences with  my  own  identity.  ...  I was  as  a 
steel  beam  of  a vast  engine,  clashing  and 
whirling  over  a gulf,  and  yet  I implored  in 
my  own  person  to  have  the  engine  stopped, 
and  my  part  in  it  hammered  off.”  Of  all  the 
wonders  that  the  student  of  science  deals 
with,  of  all  the  mysteries  that  perplex  him,  is 
there  aught  more  wonderful,  more  perplexing 
than  the  thought  that  he,  a part  of  the  mighty 
machinery  of  the  universe,  should  anxiously 
inquire  into  its  nature  and  motions,  should 
seek  to  interpret  the  design  of  its  Maker,  and 
should  be  concerned  as  to  his  own  share  in 
the  working  of  the  mysterious  mechanism  ? 


employed.  A just  use  of  the  argu- 
ment leads  to  conclusions  very  differ- 
ent from  those  commonly  accepted, 
but  not  less  different  from  that  theory 
of  the  universe  to  which  Whewell 
seems  to  have  felt  himself  driven  by 
his  recognition  of  the  illogical  nature 
of  the  ordinary  theory  respecting  the 
plurality  of  worlds. 

Let  us  consider  what  the  argument 
from  analogy  really  teaches  us  in  this 
case. 

The  just  use  of  the  argument  from 
analogy  requires  that  we  should  form 
our  opinion  respecting  the  other  plan- 
ets, chiefly  by  considering  the  lessons 
taught  us  by  our  own  earth,  the  only 
planet  we  are  acquainted  with.  In- 
deed, it  has  been  thus  that  the  belief 
in  many  inhabited  worlds  has  been 
supported  ; so  that  if  we  employ  the 
evidence  given  by  our  own  earth,  we 
cannot  be  said  to  adopt  a novel 
method  of  reasoning,  though  we  may 
be  led  to  novel  conclusions. 

The  fact  that  the  earth  is  inhabited, 
affords,  of  course,  an  argument  in 
favor  of  the  theory  that  the  other 
planets  are  also  inhabited.  In  other 
words  a certain  degree  of  probability 
is  given  to  this  theory.  But  we  must 
look  somewhat  more  closely  into  the 
matter  to  ascertain  what  the  probabil- 
ity may  amount  to.  For  there  are  all 
orders  of  probability,  from  certainty 
down  to  a degree  of  probability  so 
low  that  it  approaches  closely  to  that 
extremest  form  of  improbability,  which 
we  call  impossibility.  It  is  well  at 
once  to  take  this  logical  basis ; for 
there  are  few  mistakes  more  mischiev- 
ous than  the  supposition  that  a theory 
supported  by  certain  evidence  derives 
from  that  evidence  a probability  equal 
to  that  of  the  evidence  itself.  It  is 
absolutely  certain  that  the  one  planet 
we  know  is  inhabited  ; but  it  by  no 
means  follows  certainly  that  planets 
like  the  earth  support  life,  still  less 
that  planets  unlike  the  earth  do  so, 
and  least  of  all  that  every  planet  is 
now  the  abode  of  life. 

A higher  degree  of  probability  in 
favor  of  the  theory  that  there  are 
many  inhabited  worlds  arises  from  a 


16 


ILLUSIONS  OF  THE  SENSES: 


consideration  of  the  manner  in  which 
life  exists  on  the  earth.  If  one  could 
judge  of  a purpose  (according  to  our 
way  of  thinking)  in  all  that  is  going 
on  around  us,  our  earth  might  teach 
us  to  regard  the  support  of  life 
as  Nature’s  great  purpose.  Earth, 
water,  and  air  alike  teem  with  life. 
No  peculiarities  of  life  seem  able  to 
banish  life.  As  I have  said  else- 
where, “ in  the  bitter  cold  within  the 
Arctic  regions,  with  their  strange  al- 
ternations of  long  summer  days  and 
long  winter  nights,  their  frozen  seas, 
perennial  ice,  and  scanty  vegetation, 
life  flourishes  in  a hundred  different 
forms.  On  the  other  hand,  the  torrid 
zone,  with  its  blazing  heat,  its  long- 
continued  droughts,  its  strange  ab- 
sence of  true  seasonal  changes,  and 
its  trying  alternations  of  oppressive 
calms  and  fiercely-raging  hurricanes, 
nourishes  even  more  numerous  and 
varied  forms  of  life  than  the  great 
temperate  zones.  Around  mountain 
summits  as  in  the  depths  of  the  most 
secluded  valleys,  in  mid-ocean  as  in 
the  arid  desert,  in  the  air  as  beneath 
the  surface  of  the  earth,  we  find  a 
myriad  forms  of  life.”  Nor  is  the 
scene  changed  when,  with  the  mind’s 
eye,  we  contemplate  the  earth  during 
past  ages  of  her  history,  even  to  the 
most  remote  stage  of  her  existence  as 
a planet  fit  to  be  the  abode  of  life. 
Whenever  there  was  life  at  all,  there 
was  abundant  life.  For,  though  no 
traces  remain  of  a million  forms  of  life 
which  co-existed  with  the  few  forms 
recognized  as  belonging  to  this  or 
that  geologic  era,  yet  we  can  infer 
from  the  forms  of  which  traces  re- 
main that  others  must  have  been 
present  which  have  left  no  trace  of 
their  existence.  The  skeletons  of 
mighty  carnivora  assure  us  that  mul- 
titudes of  creatures  existed  on  which 
those  monsters  fed.  The  great  sea- 
creatures  whose  remains  have  been 
found,  attest  the  existence  of  many 
races  of  small  fish.  The  mighty 
Pterodactyl  did  not  range  through 
desert  aerial  regions,  for  he  could 
exist  only  where  many  orders  of 
aerial  creatures  also  existed.  Of 


minute  creatures  inhabiting  the 
water  we  have  records  in  the  strata 
formed  as  generation  after  generation 
sank  to  the  sea  bottom  after  death, 
whereas  the  correspondingly  minute 
inhabitants  of  the  land  and  of  the  air 
have  left  no  trace  of  their  existence ; 
yet  we  can  feel  no  reasonable  doubt 
that  in  every  geologic  age,  forms  of 
minute  life  were  as  rich  in  air  and 
on  the  land  as  in  the  sea,  or  as  they 
now  are  in  all  three.  Of  insect  life 
all  but  a few  traces  have  passed  away, 
though  occasionally,  by  some  rare 
accident,  even  so  delicate  a structure 
as  a butterfly’s  wing  has  left  its  rec- 
ord, not  only  attesting  the  existence 
of  hosts  of  insects,  but  showing  that 
delicate  flowers,  with  all  the  charms 
of  sweet  perfume  and  variegated 
color,  existed  in  those  times  as  in 
ours.  It  is  no  mere  speculation,  then, 
but  the  direct  and  unquestionable 
teaching  of  geology,  that  throughout 
the  whole  time  represented  by  the 
fossiliferous  rocks,  life  of  all  kinds 
was  most  abundant  on  our  earth. 

And  while  we  thus  recognize 
throughout  our  earth’s  history  as  a 
planet,  Nature’s  apparent  purpose  of 
providing  infinitely  varied  forms  of 
life  at  all  times  and  under  the  most 
varied  conditions,  we  also  perceive 
that  Nature  possesses  a power  of 
modifying  the  different  types  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  varying  conditions 
under  which  they  subsist.  Without 
entering  here  into  the  vexed  question 
of  the  actual  extent  to  which  the 
principle  of  selection  operates,  we 
must  admit  that  it  does  operate 
largely,  and  that  it  must  necessarily 
cause  gradual  change  of  every  type  of 
living  creature  toward  the  most  suit- 
able form.  This  particular  operation 
of  Nature  must  certainly  be  regarded 
as  an  apparent  carrying  out  of  the 
purpose  attributed  to  her, — by  our 
manner  of  speaking  when  we  say  that 
Nature’s  one  great  object  is  the  sup- 
port of  life.  If  types  were  unchange- 
able, life  would  come  to  an  end  upon 
a globe  whose  condition  is  not  only 
not  unchangeable,  but  changes  largely 
in  the  course  of  long  periods  of  time. 


AND  OTHER  ESSAYS. 


17 


But  types  of  life . change,  or  can ! 
change  when  required,  at  least  as  j 
quickly  as  the  surrounding  conditions 
— save  in  the  case  of  certain  catastro- 
phes, which,  however,  never  affect 
any  considerable  proportion  of  the 
earth’s  surface. 

Nor  is  it  easy  to  assign  any  limits 
, to  this  power  of  adaptation,  though  we 
can  scarcely  doubt  that  limits  vxist. 

| The  earth  may  so  change  in  the 
course  of  hundreds  of  thousands  of 
years  to  come  that  none  of  the  chief 
forms  of  life,  animal  or  vegetable,  at 
present  existing,  could  live  even  for 
a single  year  under  the  changed  con- 
ditions of  those  distant  times,  while 
yet  the  descendants  of  creatures  now 
living  (including  man)  may  be  as 
well  fitted  to  the  circumstances 
around  them  as  the  most  favored 
races  of  our  own  time.  Still  there 
/ must  be  a limit  beyond  which  the 
I change  of  the  earth’s  condition, 

/ whether  through  the  cooling  of  her 
\ own  globe  or  the  diminution  of  the 
sun’s  heat,  will  be  such  that  no  con- 
ceivable modification  of  the  types  of 
life  now  existing  could  render  life 
possible.  It  must  net  be  forgotten 
that  Nature’s  power  of  adaptation  is 
known  to  be  finite  in  many  cases,  and 
therefore  must  be  presumed  to  be 
finite  in  all  cases.  The  very  process 
of  selection  by  which  adaptation  is  se- 
cured implies  the  continual  failure  of 
preceding  adaptations.  The  struggle 
for  life  involves  the  repeated  victory 
of  death.  The  individuals  which 
perish  in  the  struggle  (that  is,  which 
perish  untimely)  far  outnumber  those 
which  survive.  And  what  is  true  of 
individuals  is  true  of  types.  Nature 
is  as  wasteful  of  types  as  she  is  of 
life — 

So  careful  of  the  type ; but  no, 

From  scarped  cliff  and  quarried  stone 
She  cries  “ a thousand  types  are  gone  ; 

I care  for  nothing,  all  shall  go.” 

This  is,  in  truth,  what  we  must  be- 
lieve, if,  reasoning  by  analogy,  we 
pass  but  one  step  higher  in  the 
scheme  of  creation.  We  know  that 
Nature,  wasteful  of  individual  life,  is 


equally  wasteful  of  types  of  life. 
Must  we  not  infer  that  she  is  no  less 
wasteful  of  those  aggregations  of 
types  which  constitute  the  populations 
of  worlds  ? Watching  her  operations 
a few  brief  minutes,  we  might  (setting 
experience  aside)  suppose  her  careful 
of  individual  life.  Watching  during 
a few  generations,  we  should  pro- 
nounce her  careful  of  the  type,  though 
careless  of  individual  life.  But  we 
perceive,  when  we  extend  the  range 
of  time  through  which  we  look,  that 
she  is  careless  no  less  of  the  type 
than  of  life.  Why  should  this  exten- 
sion of  the  range  of  view  be  the  last 
we  should  permit  ourselves  ? If  we 
pronounce  Nature  careful  of  the  plane- 
tary populations,  though  careless  of 
the  types  of  life  which  make  up  such 
populations,  we  are  simply  declining 
to  take  a further  step  in  the  course 
pointed  out  for  us  by  the  teachings  of 
analogy. 

Let  us  go  over  the  ground  afresh. 
Individual  creatures,  even  the  most 
favored,  perish  after  a time,  though 
the  balance  may  long  oscillate  be- 
tween life  and  death.  Weak,  at  first, 
each  creature  which  is  to  live  grows 
at  length  to  its  full  strength,  not  with- 
out vicissitudes  which  threaten  its  ex- 
istence. As  its  life  progresses  the 
struggle  continues.  At  one  time  the 
causes  tending  to  decay  seem  to  pre- 
vail a while  ; at  another,  those  which 
restore  the  vital  powers.  Disease  is 
resisted  again  and  again ; at  first 
easily,  gradually  with  greater  diffi- 
culty, until  at  length  death  wins  the 
day.  So  it  is  with  types  or  orders  of 
living  creatures.  A favored  type, 
weak  at  first,  begins  after  a while  to 
thrive,  and  eventually  attains  its  full- 
est development.  But  from  time  to 
time  the  type  is  threatened  by  dan- 
gers. Surrounding  conditions  be- 
come less  favorable.  It  ceases  to 
thrive,  or,  perhaps,  passes  through 
successive  alternations  of  decay  and 
restoration.  At  length  the  time 
comes  when  the  struggle  for  existence 
! can  manifestly  have  but  one  end ; 
and  then,  though  the  type  may  linger 
long  before  it  actually  disappears,  its 


18 


ILLUSIONS  OF  THE  SENSES: 


disappearance  is  only  a question  of 
time.  Now,  it  is  true  that  each  type 
thus  flourishing  for  a while  springs 
from  other  types  which  have  disap- 
peared. The  favored  types  of  our 
age  are  but  varieties  of  past  types. 
Yet  this  does  not  show  that  types  will 
continue  to  succeed  each  other  in 
endless  succession.  For,  if  we  con- 
sider the  matter  rightly,  we  perceive 
that  the  analogue  of  this  circumstance 
is,  in  the  case  of  individual  life,  the 
succession  of  living  creatures  genera- 
tion after  generation.  And  as  we 
know  that  each  family,  however  large, 
dies  out  in  the  long  run  unless  re- 
cruited from  without,  so  we  are  to 
infer  that  the  various  types  peopling 
this  earth,  since  they  cannot  be  re- 
cruited from  without,  must  at  length 
die  out,  though  to  our  conceptions  the 
time  necessary  for  this  process  may 
appear  infinite. 

To  the  student  of  science  who  rec- 
ognizes the  true  meaning  of  the  doc- 
trine that  force  can  be  neither  anni- 
hilated nor  created,  it  will  indeed  ap- 
pear manifest  that  life  must  eventu- 
ally perish  from  the  face  of  the  earth ; 
for  he  perceives  that  the  earth  pos- 
sesses now  a certain  fund  or  store  of 
force  in  her  inherent  heat,  which  is 
continually  though  slowly  passing 
away.  The  sun  also,  which  is  a 
store-house  whence  certain  forms  of 
force  are  distributed  to  the  earth,  has 
only  a finite  amount  of  energy  (though 
probably  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth 
are  less  directly  concerned  in  this 
than  in  the  finiteness  of  terrestrial 
forces).  Life  of  all  kinds  on  the 
earth  depends  on  both  these  stores  of 
force,  and  when  either  store  is  ex- 
hausted life  must  disappear  from  the 
earth.  But  each  store  is  in  its  nature 
limited,  and  must  one  day,  therefore, 
be  exhausted. 

We  have  also  only  to  consider  that 
life  on  the  earth  necessarily  had  a 
beginning  to  infer  that  it  must  neces- 
sarily have  an  end.  Clearest  evi- 
dence shows  how  our  earth  was  once 
“ a fluid  haze  of  light,”  and  how  for 
countless  aeons  afterwards  her  globe 


was  instinct  with  fiery  heat,  amidst 
which  no  form  of  life  could  be  con- 
ceived to  exist,  after  the  manner  of 
life  known  to  us,  though  the  germs  of 
life  may  have  been  present  “ in  the 
midst  of  the  fire.”  Then  followed 
ages  in  which  the  earth’s  glowing 
crust  was  drenched  by  showers  of 
muriatic,  nitric,  and  sulphuric  acid, 
not  only  intensely  hot,  but  fiercely 
burning  through  their  chemical  activ- 
ity. Only  after  periods  infinite  to  our 
conceptions  could  life  such  as  we 
know  it,  or  even  in  the  remotest  de- 
gree like  what  is  now  known  to  us, 
have  begun  to  exist  upon  the  earth. 

The  reader,  doubtless,  perceives 
whither  these  considerations  tend, 
and  how  they  bear  in  an  especial 
manner  on  the  opinion  we  are  to  form 
respecting  such  planets  as  Jupiter  and 
Saturn  on  the  one  hand  and  Mars  on 
the  other.  We  see  our  earth  passing 
through  a vast  period,  from  its  first 
existence  as  a separate  member  of 
the  solar  system,  to  the  time  when 
life  appeared  upon  its  surface : then 
began  a comparatively  short  period, 
now  in  progress,  during  which  the 
earth  has  been  and  will  be  the  abode 
of  life  ; and  after  that  must  follow  a 
period  infinite  to  our  conceptions 
when  the  cold  and  inert  globe  of  the 
earth  will  circle  as  lifelessly  round 
the  sun  as  the  moon  now  does.  We 
may,  if  we  please,  infer  this  from 
analogy,  seeing  that  the  duration  of 
life  is  always  infinitely  small  by  com- 
parison with  the  duration  of  the  region 
where  life  appears ; so  that,  by  anal- 
ogy, the  duration  of  life  on  the  earth 
would  be  infinitely  short  compared 
with  the  duration  of  the  earth  itself. 
But  we  are  brought  to  the  same  con- 
clusion independently  of  analogy,  per- 
ceiving that  the  fire  of  the  earth’s 
youth  and  the  deathly  cold  of  her  old 
age  must  alike  be  infinite  in  duration 
compared  with  her  period  of  vital  life- 
preserving warmth.  And  what  is 
true  of  the  earth  is  true  of  every  mem- 
ber of  the  solar  system,  major  planet, 
minor  planet,  asteroid,  or  satellite  ; 
probably  of  every  orb  in  space,  from 


AND  OTHER  ESSAYS. 


19 


the  minutest  meteorite,  to  suns  ex- 
ceeding our  sun  a thousandfold  in 
volume. 

If  we  had  any  reason  to  suppose 
that  all  the  planets  sprang  simultane- 
ously into  being,  that  each  stage  of 
each  planet’s  existence  synchronized 
with  the  same  stage  for  every  other 
planet,  and  that  life  appeared  and 
disappeared  at  corresponding  stages 
in  the  existence  of  every  planet,  we 
should  be  compelled  to  accept  the 
theory  that  at  this  moment  every 
planet  is  the  abode  of  life.  Not  only, 
however,  have  we  no  reason  to  sup- 
pose that  any  one  of  these  conditions 
exists  (and  not  one  but  all  these  con- 
ditions must  exist  before  that  theory 
can  be  accepted),  but  we  have  the 
strongest  possible  evidence,  short  of 
actual  demonstration,  that  the  births 
of  the  different  planets  occurred  at 
widely  remote  periods,  and  that  the 
several  stages  of  the  different  planets’ 
growth  differed  enormously  in  dura- 
tion ; while  analogy,  the  only  avail- 
able evidence  on  the  third  point,  as- 
sures us  that  little  resemblance  can 
be  supposed  to  exist  between  the  con- 
ditions and  requirements  of  life  in 
different  members  of  the  solar  sys- 
tem. 

On  any  reasonable  hypothesis  of 
the  evolution  of  the  solar  system,  the 
eight  primary  planets  must  have  be- 
gun to  exist  as  independent  bodies  at 
very  different  periods.  If  we  adopt 
Laplace’s  theory  of  the  gradual  con- 
traction of  a mighty  nebula,  then  we 
should  infer  that  the  planets  were 
formed  in  the  order  of  their  distances 
from  the  sun,  the  remoter  planets  be- 
ing those  formed  first.  And  accord- 
ing to  the  conditions  of  Laplace’s 
hypothesis,  the  interval  separating 
the  formation  of  one  planet  from  that 
of  its  next  neighbor  on  either  side 
must  have  been  of  enormous  duration. 
If  we  prefer  the  theory  of  the  gradual 
growth  of  each  planet  by  processes 
of  accretion,  we  should  infer  perhaps 
that  the  larger  planets  took  longest 
in  growing  to  maturity,  or  preferably 
that  (according  to  the  doctrine  of 
probabilities)  a process  which  for  the 


whole  system  must  have  been  of  in- 
conceivably enormous  length,  and  in 
which  the  formation  of  one  planet 
was  in  no  sort  connected  with  the 
formation  of  any  other,  could  not 
have  resulted  in  bringing  any  two 
planets  to  maturity  at  the  same  or 
nearly  the  same  time,  save  by  so  im- 
probable a combination  of  fortuitous 
circumstances  as  may  justly  be  con- 
sidered impossible.  If  we  consider 
that  the  solar  system  was  evolved  by 
a combination  of  both  processes  (the 
most  probable  theory  of  the  three  in 
my  opinion),  we  must  still  conclude 
that  the  epochs  of  the  formation  of 
the  different  planets  were  separated 
by  time-intervals  so  enormous  that 
the  duration  of  life  upon  our  earth  is, 
by  comparison,  as  a mere  second 
compared  with  a thousand  years. 

Again,  if  we  compare  any  two  mem- 
bers of  the  solar  system,  except,  per- 
haps Venus  and  the  Earth,  we  cannot 
doubt  that  the  duration  of  any  given 
stage  of  the  existence  of  one  must  be 
very  different  from  that  of  the  cor- 
responding stage  in  the  other.  If  we 
compare,  for  instance,  Mars  with  the 
Earth,  or  the  Earth  with  Jupiter,  and 
still  more,  if  we  compare  Mars  with 
Jupiter,  we  cannot  doubt  that  the 
smaller  orb  of  each  pair  must  pass 
much  more  rapidly  through  the  differ- 
ent stages  of  its  existence  than  the 
larger.  The  laws  of  physics  assure 
us  of  this,  apart  from  all  evidence  af- 
forded by  actual  observation  ; but  the 
results  of  observation  confirm  the 
theoretical  conclusions  deduced  from 
physical  laws.  We  cannot,  indeed, 
study  Mars  in  such  sort  as  to  ascer- 
tain his  actual  physical  condition. 
We  know  that  his  surface  is  divided 
into  lands  and  seas,  and  that  he 
possesses  an  atmosphere;  we  know 
that  the  vapor  of  water  is  at  times 
present  in  this  atmosphere ; we  can 
see  that  snows  gather  over  his  polar 
regions  in  winter  and  diminish  in 
summer : but  we  cannot  certainly  de- 
termine whether  his  oceans  are  like 
our  own,  or  for  the  most  part  frozen  ; 
the  whitish  light  which  spreads  at 
times  over  land  or  sea  may  be  due  to 


20 


ILLUSIONS  OF  THE  SENSES: 


clouds  or  to  light  snow-falls,  for  aught 
that  observation  shows  us ; the  at- 
mosphere may  be  as  dense  as  our 
own  or  exceedingly  rare ; the  polar 
regions  of  the  planet  may  resemble 
the  earth’s  polar  regions,  or  may  be 
whitened  by  snows  relatively  quite 
insignificant  in  quantity.  In  fine,  so 
far  as  observation  extends,  the  physi- 
cal condition  of  Mars  may  closely  re- 
semble that  of  the  earth,  or  be  utterly 
dissimilar.  But  we  have  indirect  ob- 
servational means  of  determining  the 
probable  condition  of  a planet  smaller 
than  the  earth,  and  presumably  older 
— that  is,  at  a later  stage  of  its  exist- 
ence. For  the  moon  is  such  a planet, 
and  the  telescope  shows  us  that  the 
moon  in  her  decrepitude  is  oceanless, 
and'is  either  wholly  without  atmosphere 
or  possesses  an  atmosphere  of  exceed- 
ing tenuity.  Hence  we  infer  that  Mars, 
which,  as  an  exterior  planet,  and 
much  smaller  than  the  earth,  is  prob- 
ably at  a far  later  stage  of  its  exist- 
ence, has  passed  far  on  its  way  to- 
ward the  same  state  of  decrepitude 
as  the  moon.  As  to  Jupiter,  though 
he  is  so  much  farther  from  us  than 
Mars,  we  have  direct  observational 
evidence,  because  of  the  vast  scale 
on  which  all  the  processes  in  progress 
on  his  mighty  globe  are  taking  place. 
We  see  that  his  whole  surface  is  en- 
wrapped in  cloud-layers  of  enormous 
depth,  and  undergoing  changes  which 
imply  an  intense  activity  (or,  in  other 
words,  an  intense  heat)  throughout 
his  whole  mass.  We  recognize  in 
the  planet’s  appearance  the  signs  of 
as  near  an  approach  to  the  conditions 
of  the  earth  when  as  yet  the  greater 
part  of  her  mass  was  vaporous,  as  is 
consistent  with  the  vast  difference 
necessarily  existing  between  two  orbs 
containing  such  unequal  quantities  of 
matter. 

Mars,  on  the  one  hand,  differs  from 
the  earth  in  being  a far  older  planet 
— probably,  as  respects  the  actual 
time  which  has  elapsed  since  the 
planet  was  formed,  and  certainly  as 
respects  the  stage  of  its  career  which 
it  has  now  reached.  Jupiter,  on  the 
other  hand,  differs  from  the  earth  in 


being  a far  younger  planet — not  in 
years  perhaps,  but  in  condition.  As 
to  the  actual  age  of  Jupiter  we  cannot 
form  so  probable  an  opinion  as  in 
the  case  of  Mars.  Mars  being  an  ex- 
terior planet,  must  have  begun  to  be 
formed  long  before  the  earth  and 
being  a much  smaller  planet,  was 
probably  a shorter  time  in  attaining 
its  mature  growth.  On  both  accounts, 
therefore,  he  would  be  much  older 
than  the  earth  in  years ; while,  as  we 
have  seen,  his  relative  smallness 
would  cause  the  successive  stages  of 
his  career  subsequent  to  his  existence 
as  an  independent  and  mature  planet 
to  be  much  shorter.  Jupiter,  being 
exterior  to  Mars,  presumably  began  to 
be  formed  millions  of  centuries  be 
fore  that  planet,  but  his  bulk  and 
mass  so  enormously  exceed  those  of 
Mars,  that  his  growth  must  have  re- 
quired  a far  longer  time ; so  that  it 
is  not  at  all  certain  that  even  in  point 
of  years  Jupiter  (dating  from  his  ma- 
turity) may  not  be  the  youngest  mem- 
ber of  the  solar  system.  But  even  if 
not,  it  is  practically  certain  that,  as 
regards  development,  Jupiter  is  far 
younger  than  any  member  of  the 
solar  system,  save  perhaps  his 
brother-giant  Saturn,  whose  greater 
antiquity  and  inferior  mass  (both  sug- 
gesting a later  stage  of  development) 
may  have  been  counterbalanced  by  a 
comparative  sluggishness  of  growth 
in  the  outer  parts  of  the  solar  do- 
main. 

It  is  manifest  from  observed  facts, 
in  the  case  of  Jupiter,  that  he  is  as 
yet  far  removed  from  the  life-bearing 
stage  of  planetary  existence,  and 
theoretical  considerations  point  to  the 
same  conclusion.  In  the  case  of 
Mars,  theoretical  considerations  ren- 
der it  extremely  probable  that  he 
has  long  since  passed  the  life-bearing 
stage,  and  observed  facts,  though, 
they  do  not  afford  strong  evidence  in 
favor  of  this  conclusion,  suggest  noth- 
ing which,  rightly  considered,  is  op- 
posed to  it.  It  "is  true  that,  as  we 
have  shown  in  former  essays  on  this 
planet,  Mars  presents  many  features 
of  resemblance  to  our  earth.  This 


AND  OTHER  ESSAYS. 


21 


planet  rotates  in  a period  not  differ- 
ing much  from  our  day;  his  year  does 
not  exceed  ours  so  greatly  as  to  sug- 
gest relations  unpleasantly  affecting 
living  creatures ; it  has  been  shown 
that  there  are  oceans  on  Mars,  though 
it  is  not  quite  so  clear  that  they  are 
not  for  the  most  part  frozen  ; he  has 
an  atmosphere,  and  the  vapor  of 
water  is  at  times  present  in  that  at- 
mosphere as  in  ours ; clouds  form 
there ; snow  falls,  and  perhaps  rain 
from  time  to  time ; ice  and  snow 
gather  at  the  poles  in  winter,  and  are 
partially  melted  in  summer  ; the  land 
surface  must  necessarily  be  uneven, 
seeing  that  the  very  existence  of  con- 
tinents and  oceans  implies  that  once, 
at  any  rate,  the  globe  of  Mars 
was  subjected  to  forces  resembling 
those  which  have  produced  the  ir- 
regularities of  the  earth’s  surface ; 
glacial  action  must  still  be  going  on 
there,  even  if  there  is  no  rain-fall,  and 
therefore  no  denuding  action  cor- 
responding to  that  which  results  from 
the  fall  of  rain  on  our  terrestrial  con- 
tinents. But  it  is  a mistake  (and  a 
mistake  too  commonly  made)  to  sup- 
pose that  the  continuance  of  those 
natural  processes  which  are  advanta- 
geous to  living  creatures,  implies  the 
existence  of  such  creatures.  The  as- 
sumption is  that  the  beneficent  proc- 
esses of  nature  are  never  wasted 
according  to  our  conceptions.  Yet 
we  see  over  and  over  again  in  nature 
not  merely  what  resembles  waste, 
what  in  fact  is  waste  according  to  our 
ideas,  but  an  enormous  excess  of 
wasted  over  utilized  processes.  The 
sun  pours  forth  on  all  sides  the  sup- 
plies of  light  and  heat  which,  where 
received  as  on  our  earth,  sustain 
vegetable  and  animal  life;  but  the 
portion  received  by  our  earth  is  less 
than  the  2000  millionth,  the  portion 
received  by  all  the  planets  less  than 
the  230  millionth  part,  of  the  total 
force  thus  continually  expended. 
And  this  is  typical  of  nature’s  opera- 
tions everywhere.  The  earth  on 
which  we  live  illustrates  the  truth  as 
clearly  as  the  sun.  We  are  apt  to 
say  that  it  teems  with  life,  forgetting 


that  the  region  occupied  by  living 
creatures  of  all  orders  is  a mere  shell, 
while  the  whole  interior  mass  of  the 
earth,  far  larger  in  volume,  and  un- 
dergoing far  more  active  processes  of 
change — teeming,  in  fact,  with  energy 
— contains  no  living  creature,  or  at 
least  can  only  be  supposed  to  contain 
living  creatures  by  imagining  condi- 
tions of  life  utterly  different  from 
those  we  are  familiar  with. 

The  mere  continuance,  therefore, 
on  Mars  of  processes  which  on  the 
earth  we  associate  with  the  existence 
of  life,  in  reality  proves  nothing  as  to 
the  continued  existence  of  life  on 
Mars.  The  surface  of  the  moon,  for 
example,  must  undergo  disturbances, — 
mighty  throes,  as  the  great  wave  of 
sun-distributed  heat  circles  round  her 
orb  once  in  each  lunation, — yet  few 
suppose  that  there  is  life,  or  has  been 
for  untold  ages,  on  the  once  teeming 
surface  of  our  companion  planet.  The 
formation  of  Mars  as  a planet  must 
so  long  have  preceded  that  of  our 
earth,  his  original  heat  must  have 
been  so  much  less,  his  small  globe 
must  have  parted  with  such  heat  as  it 
once  had  so  much  more  rapidly,  Mars 
lies  so  much  farther  from  the  sun  than 
our  earth  does,  his  atmosphere  is  so 
much  rarer,  his  supply  of  water  (the 
temperature-conserving  element)  is 
relatively  as  well  as  absolutely  so 
much  smaller,  that  his  surface  must 
be  utterly  unfit  to  support  life  in  the 
remotest  degree  resembling  the  forms 
of  life  known  on  earth  (save,  of  course, 
those  lower  forms  which  from  the  out- 
set we  have  left  out  of  consideration). 
Yet  at  one  time,  a period  infinitely  re- 
mote according  to  our  conceptions  of 
time,  the  globe  of  Mars  must  have  re- 
sembled our  earth’s  in  warmth,  and 
in  being  disturbed  by  the  internal 
forces  which  cause  that  continual  re- 
modeling of  a planet’s  surface  with- 
out which  life  must  soon  pass  away. 
Again,  in  that  remote  period  the  sun 
himself  was  appreciably  younger;  for 
we  must  remember  that  although, 
measured  by  ordinary  time-intervals, 
the  sun  seems  to  give  forth  an  unvary- 
ing supply  of  heat  day  by  day,  a real 


22 


ILLUSIONS  OF  THE  SENSES  : 


process  of  exhaustion  is  in  progress 
there  also.  At  one  time  there  must 
have  existed  on  Mars  as  near  an  ap- 
proach to  the  present  condition  of  our 
earth,  or  rather  to  her  general  condi- 
tion during  this  life-supporting  era  of 
her  existence,  as  is  consistent  with 
the  difference  in  the  surface  gravity  of 
the  planets,  and  with  other  differences 
inherent  as  it  were  in  their  nature. 
Since  Mars  must  also  have  passed 
through  the  fiery  stage  of  planetary 
life,  and  through  that  intermediate 
period  when,  as  it  would  seem,  life 
springs  spontaneously  into  being 
under  the  operation  of  natural  laws 
not  as  yet  understood  by  us,  we  can- 
not doubt  that  when  his  globe  was 
thus  fit  for  the  support  of  life,  life  ex- 
isted upon  it.  Thus  for  a season, — 
enormously  long  compared  with  our 
ordinary  time-measures,  but  very 
short  compared  with  the  life-support- 
ing era,  of  our  earth’s  career, — Mars 
was  a world  like  our  own,  filled  with 
various  forms  of  life.  Doubtless, 
these  forms  changed  as  the  conditions 
around  them  changed,  advancing  or 
retrograding  as  the  conditions  were 
favorable  or  the  reverse,  perhaps  de- 
veloping into  forms  corresponding  to 
the  various  races  of  men  in  possession 
of  reasoning  powers,  but  possibly  only 
attaining  to  the  lower  attributes  of 
consciousness  when  the  development 
of  life  on  Mars  was  at  its  highest, 
thenceforth  passing  by  slow  degrees 
into  lower  types  as  the  old  age  of 
Mars  approached,  and  finally  perish- 
ing as  cold  and  death  seized  the 
planet  for  their  prey. 

In  the  case  of  Jupiter,  we  are 
guided  by  observed  facts  to  the  con- 
clusion that  ages  must  elapse  before 
life  can  be  possible.  Theory  tells  us 
that  this  mighty  planet,  exceeding  the 
earth  three  hundred  times  in  mass, 
and  containing  five-sevenths  of  the 
mass  of  the  whole  system  of  bodies 
traveling  around  the  sun,  must  still 
retain  a large  portion  of  its  original 
heat,  even  if  we  suppose  its  giant  orb 
took  no  longer  in  fashioning  than  the 
small  globe  of  our  earth.  Theory 
tells  us,  moreover,  that  so  vast  a globe 


could  not  possibly  have  so  small  a 
density  (less  than  one  fourth  the 
earth’s)  under  the  mighty  compressing 
force  of  its  own  gravity,  unless  some 
still  more  potent  cause  were  at  work 
to  resist  that  tremendous  compression 
— and  this  force  can  be  looked  for 
nowhere  but  in  the  intense  heat  of  the 
planet’s  whole  mass.  But  observation 
shows  us  also  that  Jupiter  is  thus 
heated.  For  we  see  that  the  planet 
is  surrounded  by  great  cloud-belts 
such  as  our  own  sun  would  be  incom- 
petent to  raise, — far  more  so  the 
small  sun  which  would  be  seen  in  the 
skies  of  Jupiter  if  already  a firmament 
had  been  set  “in  the  midst  of  the 
waters.”  We  see  that  these  belts 
undergo  marvelous  changes  of  shape 
and  color,  implying  the  action  of  ex- 
ceeding energetic  forces.  We  know 
from  observation  that  the  region  in 
which  the  cloud-bands  form  is  exceed- 
ingly deep,  even  if  the  innermost  re- 
gion to  which  the  telescope  penetrates 
is  the  true  surface  of  the  planet — 
while  there  is  reason  for  doubting 
whether  there  may  not  be  cloud-layer 
within  cloud-layer,  to  a depth  of  many 
thousand  miles, — or  even  whether  the 
planet  has  any  real  surface  at  all. 
And,  knowing  from  the  study  of  the 
earth’s  crust  that  for  long  ages  the 
whole  mass  of  our  globe  was  in  a 
state  of  fiery  heat,  while  a yet  longer 
period  preceded  this  when  the  earth’s 
globe  was  vaporous,  we  infer  from  anal- 
ogy that  Jupiter  is  passing,  though 
far  more  slowly,  through  stages  of 
his  existence  corresponding  with  ter- 
restrial eras  long  anterior  to  the  ap- 
pearance of  life  upon  the  scene. 

We  must,  then,  in  the  case  of  Jupi- 
ter, look  to  a far  distant  future  for  the 
period  of  the  planet’s  existence  as  a 
life-sustainer.  The  intense  heat  of 
the  planet  must  in  course  of  time  be 
gradually  radiated  away  into  space, 
until  at  length  the  time  will  come 
when  life  will  be  possible.  Then, 
doubtless,  will  follow  a period  (far 
longer  than  the  life-sustaining  portion 
of  the  earth’s  existence)  during  which 
Jupiter  will  in  his  turn  be  the  abode 
of  life.  It  may  be  that  before  then 


AND  OTHER  ESSAYS. 


23 


the  sun  will  have  lost  so  large  a pro- 
portion of  heat  that  life  in  Jupiter 
will  be  mainly  sustained  by  the 
planet’s  inherent  heat.  But;  more 
probably  the  changes  in  the  sun’s  heat 
take  place  far  more  slowly  than  the 
changes  in  the  condition  of  any  planet, 
even  the  largest.  Possibly,  even,  the 
epoch  when  Jupiter  will  be  a fit  abode 
for  life,  will  be  so  remote  that  the 
sun’s  fires  will  have  been  recruited  by 
the  indrawing  of  the  interior  family 
of  planets.  For  it  must  be  remem- 
bered that  the  periods  we  have  to 
deal  with  in  considering  the  cooling 
of  such  an  orb  as  Jupiter  are  so  enor- 
mous, that  not  merely  the  ordinary 
time-measures,  but  even  the  vast  pe- 
riods dealt  with  by  geologists  must  be 
insignificant  by  comparison.  Yonder 
is  Jupiter  still  enwrapped  in  clouds  of 
vapor  raised  by  his  internal  heat, 
still  seething,  as  it  were,  in  his  prime- 
val fires,  though  the  earth  has  passed 
through  all  the  first  stages  of  her  ex- 
istence, and  has  even  long  since 
passed  the  time  of  her  maturity  as  a 
life-sustaining  globe.  It  is  no  mere 
fancy  to  say  that  all  the  eras  of  Jupi- 
ter’s existence  must  be  far  longer 
than  the  corresponding  terrestrial 
eras,  since  we  actually  see  Jupiter  in 
that  early  stage  of  his  existence  and 
know  that  the  earth  has  passed 
through  many  stages  toward  the  final 
eras  of  decay  and  death.  It  is,  indeed 
impossible  to  form  any  opinion  as  to 
the  probable  condition  of  the  sun  or 
of  the  solar  system  when  Jupiter  shall 
become  fit  to  support  life,  seeing  that, 
for  aught  we  know,  far  higher  cycles 
than  those  measured  by  the  planetary 
motions  may  be  passed  ere  that  time 
arrives.  The  sun  may  not  be  a solitary 
star  but  a member  of  a star-system, 
and  before  Jupiter  has  cooled  down 
to  the  life-sustaining  condition,  the 
sun’s  relation  to  other  suns  of  his 
own  system  may  have  altered  mate- 
rially, although  no  perceptible  changes 
have  occurred  during  the  relatively 
minute  period  (a  trifle  of  four  thou- 
sand years  or  so)  since  astronomy 
began. 

In  considering  the  case  of  Mars,  I 


suggested  the  possibility  that  owing 
to  the  relative  shortness  of  that 
planet’s  life-sustaining  era,  the  de- 
velopment of  the  higher  forms  of  life 
may  have  been  less  complete  than  on 
our  earth  thus  far  (still  less  than  the 
development  of  those  forms  on  the 
earth  in  the  coming  ages).  We  may 
well  believe  that  during  the  long  pe- 
riod of  Jupiter’s  existence  as  a life- 
supporting planet,  creatures  far  higher 
in  the  scale  of  being  than  any  that 
have  inhabited,  or  may  hereafter  in- 
habit, the  earth,  will  be  brought  into 
existence.  As  the  rule  of  nature  on 
earth  has  been  to  advance  from  sim- 
ple to  more  complex  forms,  from 
lower  types  to  higher,  so  (following 
the  argument  from  analogy)  we  must 
suppose  the  law  of  nature  to  be  else- 
where. And  time  being  a necessary 
element  in  any  process  of  natural  de- 
velopment, it  follows  that  where  na- 
ture is  allowed  a longer  time  to  ope- 
rate, higher  forms,  nobler  types,  will 
be  developed.  If  this  be  so,  then  in 
Jupiter,  the  prince  of  planets,  higher 
forms  of  animated  conscious  being 
will  doubtless  be  developed  than  in 
any  other  planet.  We  need  not,  in- 
deed, point  out  that  the  supposition 
on  which  this  conclusion  rests  is 
merely  speculative,  and  that  now, 
when  the  laws  of  natural  develop- 
ment have  so  recently  begun  to  ,be 
recognized  and  are  still  so  imperfectly 
known,  the  argument  from  analogy  is 
(in  this  particular  case)  necessarily 
weak.  Nevertheless,  analogy  points 
in  the  direction  we  have  indicated, 
and  it  is  well  to  look  outward  and  on- 
ward in  that  direction,  even  though  the 
objects  within  the  view  are  too  remote 
for  us  to  perceive  their  real  forms. 

But,  limiting  our  conclusions  to 
those  which  may  be  justly  inferred 
from  known  facts,  let  us  inquire  how 
the  subject  of  life  in  other  worlds 
presents  itself  when  dealt  with  ac- 
cording to  the  relations  above  con- 
sidered. 

It  is  manifest  at  once  that  whether 
our  new  ideas  respecting  the  present 
condition  of  Mars  or  Jupiter  be  cor- 
rect or  not,  the  general  argument  de- 


24 


ILLUSIONS  OF  THE  SENSES : 


ducible  from  the  analogy  of  our  own 
earth  remains  unaffected.  If  Mars 
and  Jupiter  be  at  this  moment  in- 
habited by  living  creatures,  it  can 
only  be  because  these  orbs  happen  to 
be  passing  through  the  life-supporting 
period  of  their  existence.  We  have 
shown  that  there  is  strong  reason  for 
believing  this  not  to  be  the  case ; but 
if  it  is  the  case,  this  can  only  be  re- 
garded as  a strange  chance.  For  we 
have  learned  from  the  study  of  our 
earth,  that  the  life-supporting  era  of  a 
planet  is  short  compared  with  the 
duration  of  the  planet’s  existence.  It 
follows  that  any  time  selected  at  ran- 
dom in  the  history  of  a planet  is  far 
more  likely  to  belong  to  one  or  other 
of  the  two  lifeless  eras,  one  preceding, 
the  other  following  the  life-support- 
ing era,  than  to  belong  to  this  short 
era  itself.  And  this  present  time  is 
time  selected  at  random  with  refer- 
ence to  any  other  orb  in  the  universe 
than  our  own  earth.  We  are  so  apt 
to  measure  all  the  operations  of  na- 
ture by  our  own  conceptions  of  them, 
as  well  in  space  as  in  time,  that  as 
the  solar  system  presents  itself  (even 
now)  as  the  center  of  the  universe,  so 
this  present  time,  the  era  of  our  own 
life,  or  of  our  nation’s  life,  or  of  the 
life  of  man,  or  of  the  existence  of  or- 
ganic beings  on  the  earth,  or  (passing 
yet  a grade  - higher)  the  era  of  our 
earth’s  existence  as  a planet,  presents 
itself  to  us  as  the  central  era  of  all 
time.  But  what  has  been  shown  to 
be  false  with  respect  to  space  is 
equally  false  with  respect  to  time. 
Men  of  old  thought  that  the  petty  re- 
gion in  which  they  lived  was  the  cen- 
ter of  the  universe.  After  this  was 
shown  to  be  false  by  Copernicus, 
Kepler,  and  Newton,  men  clung  in 
turn  to  the  conception  that  the  solar 
system  is  central  within  the  universe. 
The  elder  Herschel  showed  that  this 
conception  also  is  false.  Even  he, 
however,  assigned  to  the  sun  a posi- 
tion whence  the  galaxy  might  be 
measured.  But  it  begins  to  be  rec- 
ognized that  this  is  not  so.  Nay,  not 
only  is  the  sun  no  suitable  center 
whence  to  measure  the  stellar  system, 


but  the  stellar  system  is  for  us  im- 
measurable. The  galaxy  has  no  cen- 
ter and  no  limits  ; or  rather  we  may 
say  of  it  what  Blaise  Pascal  said  of 
the  universe  of  space — its  center  is 
everywhere  and  its  circumference  no- 
where. The  whole  progress  of  mod- 
ern science  tends  to  show  that  we 
must  similarly  extend  our  estimate  of 
time.  In  former  ages  each  genera- 
tion was  apt  to  regard  its  own  era  as 
critical  in  the  earth’s  history  ; that  is, 
according  to  their  ideas,  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  universe  itself.  Gradually 
men  perceived  that  no  generation  of 
men,  no  nation,  no  group  of  nations, 
occupies  a critical  or  central  position 
in  the  history  of  even  the  human  race 
upon  earth,  far  less  in  the  history  of 
organic  life.  We  may  now  pass  a 
step  higher,  and,  contemplating  the 
infinity  of  time,  admit  that  the  whole 
duration  of  this  earth’s  existence  is 
but  as  a single  pulsation  in  the 
mighty  life  of  the  universe.  Nay, 
the  duration  of  the  solar  system  is 
scarcely  more.  Countless  other  such 
systems  have  passed  through  all  their 
stages,  and  have  died  out,  untold 
ages  before  the  sun  and  his  family 
began  to  be  formed  out  of  their 
mighty  nebula  ; countless  others  will 
come  into  being  after  the  life  has  de- 
parted from  our  system.  Nor  need 
we  stop  at  solar  systems,  since  within 
the  infinite  universe,  without  begin- 
ning and  without  end,  not  suns  only 
but  systems  of  suns,  galaxies  of  such 
systems,  to  higher  and  higher  orders 
endlessly,  have  long  since  passed 
through  all  the  stages  of  their  exist- 
ence as  systems,  or  have  all  those 
stages  yet  to  pass  through.  In  the 
presence  of  time-intervals  thus  seen  to 
be  at  once  infinitely  great  and  infi- 
nitely little — infinitely  great  compared 
with  the  duration  of  our  earth,  infi- 
nitely f little  by  comparison  with  the 
eternities  amidst  which  they  are  lost — 
what  reason  can  we  have  when  viewing 
any  orb  in  space  from  our  little  earth, 
for  saying  now  is  the  time  when  that 
orb  is,  like  our  earth,  the  abode  of  life  ? 
Why  should  life  on  that  orb  synchro- 
nize with  life  on  the  earth  ? Are  not. 


AND  OTHER  ESSAYS. 


25- 


on  the  contrary,  the  chances  infinitely 
great  against  such  a coincidence  ? If, 
as  Helmholtz  has  well  said,  the  dura- 
tion of  life  on  our  earth  is  but  the  mi- 
nutest “ ripple  in  the  infinite  ocean  of 
time,”  and  the  duration  of  life  on  any 
other  planet  of  like  minuteness,  what 
reason  can  we  have  for  supposing 
that  those  remote,  minute,  and  no 
way  associated  waves  of  life  must 
needs  be  abreast  of  each  other  on  the 
infinite  ocean  whose  surface  they 
scarcely  ripple  ? 

But  let  us  consider  the  conse- 
quences to  which  we  are  thus  led. 
Apart  from  theoretical  considerations 
or  observed  facts,  it  is  antecedently 
improbable  that  any  planet  selected 
at  random,  whether  planet  of  our  own 
system,  or  planet  attending  on  another 
sun  than  ours,  is  at  this  present  time 
the  abode  of  life.  The  degree  of  im- 
probability corresponds  to  the  pro- 
portion between  the  duration  of  life 
on  a planet,  and  the  duration  of  the 
planet’s  independent  existence.  We 
may  compare  this  proportion  to  that 
existing  between  the  average  life-time 
of  a man  and  the  duration  of  the  hu- 
man race. 

If  one  person  were  to  select  at  ran- 
dom the  period  of  a man’s  life,  whether 
in  historic,  prehistoric,  or  future  time, 
and  another  were  to  select  an  epoch 
equally  at  random,  save  only  that  it 
fell  somewhere  within  the  period  of 
the  duration  of  the  human  race,  we 
know  how  exceedingly  minute  would 
be  the  probability  that  the  epoch  se- 
lected by  the  second  person  would 
fall  within  the  period  selected  by  the 
first.  Correspondingly  minute  is  the 
a priori  probability  that  at  this  pres- 
ent epoch  any  planet  selected  at 
random  is  the  abode  of  life.  This  is 
not  a mere  speculation,  but  an  abso- 
lute certainty,  if  we  admit  as  certain 
the  fact,  which  few  now  question, 
that  the  period  during  which  organic 
existence  is  possible  on  any  planet 
is  altogether  minute  compared  with 
the  duration  of  that  planet’s  exist- 
ence. 

The  same  relation  is  probably  true 
when  we  pass  to  higher  systems. 


Regarding  the  suns  we  call  “ the 
stars  ” as  members  of  a siderial  sys- 
tem of  unknown  extent  (one  of  in- 
numerable systems  of  the  same  order), 
the  chance  that  any  sun  selected  at 
random  is,  like  our  own  sun  at  the 
present  time,  attended  by  a planetary 
system  in  one  member  of  which  at 
least  life  exists,  is  exceedingly  small, 
if,  as  is  probable,  the  life-supporting 
era  of  a solar  system’s  existence  is 
very  short  compared  with  the  inde- 
pendent existence  of  the  system.  If 
the  disproportion  is  of  the  same 
order  as  in  the  case  of  a single  planet, 
the  probability  is  of  the  same  order 
of  minuteness.  In  other  words,  if  we 
select  any  star  at  random,  it  is  as  un- 
likely that  the  system  attending  on 
that  sun  is  at  present  in  the  life-bear- 
ing stage  as  a system,  as  it  is  that  any 
planet  selected  at  random  is  at  pres- 
ent in  the  life-bearing  stage  as  a 
planet.  This  conclusion,  indeed, 
may  be  regarded  as  scarcely  less  cer- 
tain than  the  former,  seeing  that  we  as 
little  doubt  the  relative  vastness  of  the 
periods  of  our  sun’s  existence  before 
and  after  his  existence  as  a supporter 
of  life,  as  we  doubt  the  relative  vast- 
ness of  the  periods  before  and  after 
the  life-supporting  era  of  any  given 
planet.  There  is,  however,  one  ele- 
ment of  doubt  in  the  case  of  the  star. 
The  very  fact  of  the  star’s  ^existence 
as  a steady  source  of  light  and  heat 
implies  that  the  star  is  in  a stage  re- 
sembling that  through  which  our  own 
sun  is  now  passing.  It  may  be,  for 
instance,  that  the  prior  stages  of  solar 
life  are  indicated  by  some  degree  of 
nebulosity,  and  the  later  stages  by 
irregular  variations,  or  by  such 
rapid  dying  out  in  brightness  as  has 
been  observed  in  many  stars.  Yet  a 
sun  must  be  very  nebulous  indeed — 
that  is,  must  be  at  a very  early  stage 
in  its  history — for  astronomers  to  be 
able  to  detect  its  nebulosity ; and, 
again,  a sun  must  long  have  ceased 
to  be  a life-supporter  before  any 
signs  of  decadence  measurable  at 
our  remote  station,  and  with  our  in- 
significant available  time-intervals 
for  comparison,  are  manifested. 


26 


ILLUSIONS  OF  THE  SENSES: 


As  to  higher  orders  than  systems 
of  suns  we  cannot  speculate,  because 
we  have  no  means  of  determining 
the  nature  of  such  orders.  For  in- 
stance, the  arrangement  and  motions 
of  the  only  system  of  suns  we  know 
of,  the  galaxy,  are  utterly  unlike  the 
arrangements  and  motions  of  the 
only  system  of  planets  we  know  of. 
Quite  possibly  systems  of  sun-sys- 
tems are  unlike  either  galaxies  or 
solar  systems  in  arrangement  and 
motions.  But  if,  by  some  wonderful 
extension  of  our  perceptive  powers, 
we  could  recognize  the  countless 
millions  of  systems  of  galaxies  doubt- 
less existing  in  infinite  space,  with- 
out, however,  being  able  to  ascertain 
whether  the  stage  through  which  any 
one  of  those  systems  was  passing  corre- 
sponded to  the  stage  through  which 
our  galaxy  is  at  present  passing,  the 
probability  of  life  existing  anywhere 
within  the  limits  of  a galaxy  so  se- 
lected at  random  would  be  of  the 
same  order  as  the  probability  that  life 
exists  either  in  a planet  taken  at  ran- 
dom, or  in  a solar  system  taken  at 
random.  For  though  the  number  of 
suns  is  enormously  increased,  and 
still  more  the  number  of  subordinate 
orbs  like  planets  (in  posse  or  in  esse), 
the  magnitude  of  the  time-intervals 
concerned  is  correspondingly  in- 
creased. One  chance  out  of  a thou- 
sand is  as  good  as  a thousand  chances 
out  of  a million,  or  as  a million  out  of 
a thousand  millions.  Whether  we 
turn  our  thoughts  to  planet,  sun,  or 
galaxy,  the  law  of  Nature  (recognized 
as  universal  within  the  domain  as 
yet  examined),  that  the  duration  of 
life  in  the  individual  is  indefinitely 
short  compared  with  the  duration  of 
the  type  to  which  the  individual  be- 
longs, assures  us,  or  at  least  renders 
it  highly  probable,  that  in  any  mem- 
ber of  any  of  these  orders  taken  at 
ramdom,  it  is  more  probable  that  life  is 
wanting  than  that  life  exists  at  this 
present  time.  Nevertheless,  it  is  at 
least  as  probable  that  every  member  of 
every  order — planet,  sun,  galaxy,  and 
so  onward  to  higher  and  higher  orders 
endlessly — has  been,  is  now , or  will 


hereafter  be,  life- supporting  “ after  its 
kind 

In  what  degree  life-supporting 
worlds,  or  suns,  or  systems  are  at 
this  or  any  other  epoch  surpassed  in 
number  by  those  which  as  yet  fulfill 
no  such  functions  or  have  long  since 
ceased  to  fulfill  them,  it  would  only 
be  possible  to  pronounce  if  we  could 
determine  the  average  degree  in 
which  the  life-sustaining  era  of  given 
orbs  or  systems  is  surpassed  in  length 
by  the  preceding  and  following 
stages.  The  life-sustaining  orbs  or 
systems  may  be  surpassed  many 
thousandfold  or  many  millionfold  in 
number  by  those  as  yet  lifeless  or 
long  since  dead,  or  the  disproportion 
may  be  much  less  or  much  greater. 
As  yet  we  only  know  that  it  must  be 
very  great  indeed. 

But  at  first  sight  the  views  here  ad- 
vanced may  appear  as  repugnant  to  our 
ordinary  ideas  as  Whewell’s  belief  that 
perhaps  our  earth  is  the  only  in- 
habited orb  in  the  universe.  Millions 
of  uninhabited  worlds  for  each  orb 
which  sustains  life ! surely  that  im- 
plies incredible  waste  ! If  not  waste 
of  matter,  since  according  to  the  the- 
ory every  orb  sustains  life  in  its  turn, 
yet  still  a fearful  waste  of  time.  To 
this  it  may  be  replied,  first,  that  we 
must  take  facts  as  we  find  them. 
And  secondly,  whether  space  or 
matter  or  time  or  energy  appear  to 
be  wasted,  we  must  consider  that, 
after  all,  space  and  matter  and  time 
and  energy  are  necessarily  infinite,  so 
that  the  portion  utilized  (according 
to  our  conceptions)  being  a finite 
portion  of  the  infinite  is  itself  also  in- 
finite. Speaking,  however,  on  the 
subject  we  are  upon,  if  one  only  of 
each  million  of  the  orbs  in  the  uni- 
verse is  inhabited,  the  number  of  in- 
habited orbs  is  nevertheless  infinite. 
Moreover,  it  must  be  remembered 
that  our  knowledge  is  far  too  imper- 
fect for  us  to  be  able  to  assert  confi- 
dently that  space,  time,  matter,  and 
force,  though  not  utilized  according  to 
our  conceptions,  are  therefore  neces- 
sarily wasted.  To  the  ignorant  sav- 
age, grain  which  is  planted  in  a field 


AND  OTHER  ESSAYS. 


27 


instead  of  being  used  for  food,  seems 
wasted,  the  wide  field  seems  wasted, 
the  time  wasted  during  which  the 
grain  is  growing  and  ripening  into 
harvest ; but  wiser  men  know  that 
what  looks  like  waste  is  in  reality 
economy.  In  like  manner  the  sun’s 
rays  poured  on  all  sides  into  space  so 
that  his  circling  family  receives  but 
the  230  millionth  portion,  seem,  to 
our  imperfect  conceptions,  almost 
wholly  wasted  ; but,  if  our  knowledge 
were  increased,  we  should  perhaps 
form  a far  different  opinion.  So  it  may 
well  be  with  the  questions  which  per- 
plex us  when  we  contemplate  the 
short  duration  of  the  life-sustaining 
condition  of  each  world  and  sun  and 
galaxy  compared  with  the  whole  exist- 
ence of  these  several  orders.  The 
arrangement  which  seems  so  wasteful 
of  space  and  time  and  matter  and 
force,  may  in  reality  involve  the  most 
perfect  possible  use  and  employment 
of  every  portion  of  space,  every  in- 
stant of  time,  every  particle  of  matter, 
>every  form  of  force. 


EARTHQUAKES. 

It  is  related  in  the  Timceus  of  Plato 
that  the  ancient  Egyptians  held  the 
world  to  be  liable  to  occasional 
widely-extended  catastrophes,  by 
which  the  gods  checked  the  evil  pro- 
pensities of  men,  and  cleansed  the 
earth  from  guilt.  Conflagrations, 
deluges  and  earthquakes  were  the 
instruments  of  the  wrath  of  the 
offended  gods.  After  each  catastro- 
phe mankind  were  innocent  and 
happy,  but  from  this  state  of  virtue 
they  gradually  fell  away,  until  their 
accumulated  offences  called  for  new 
judgments.  Then  the  gods  took 
counsel  together,  and  unable  to  bear 
with  the  multiplied  iniquities  of  the 
human  race,  swept  them  from  the 
earth  in  some  great  cataclysm,  or 
sent  a devouring  flame  to  consume 
them,  or  shook  the  solid  earth  until 
hills  and  mountains  fell  upon  and 


crushed  the  inhabitants  of  the  whole 
world. 

One  can  understand  how  the  con- 
fused records  of  great  catastrophes, 
in  which  all,  or  nearly  all,  the  inhabi- 
tants of  wide  districts  were  destroyed, 
led  in  the  course  of  time  to  the  forma- 
tion of  such  views  as  Plato  has  de- 
scribed. And,  indeed,  it  is  not  in 
one  nation  alone  that  we  find  theories 
of  this  sort  prevalent.  In  the  Institute 
of  Menu  the  Hindoos  are  taught  that 
at  the  end  of  each  of  those  cycles  of 
ages  which  are  termed  the  “ days  of. 
Brahma,”  all  forms  of  life  are  de- 
stroyed from  the  earth  by  a great 
conflagration,  followed  by  a deluge 
which  inundates  heaven  itself.  The 
mythical  legends  of  the  Chinese  refer 
to  similar  views,  which  appear  also  in 
the  Babylonian  and  Persian  cosmog- 
onies. The  Chaldeans  taught  that 
when  the  planets  are  all  conjoined  in 
Capricorn  the  earth  will  be  over- 
whelmed by  a flood,  and  that  when  a 
conjunction  of  this  sort  takes  place  in 
Cancer  the  earth  will  be  destroyed  by 
fire. 

In  the  present  age  when  the  net- 
work of  telegraphy  brings  all  parts  of 
the  earth  into  close  intercommunica- 
tion, we  are  not  likely  to  trace,  even 
in  the  most  widespread  disasters,  the 
approaching  destruction  of  our  globe. 
The  same  day  which  brings  the  intel- 
ligence of  some  desolating  catastro- 
phe brings  evidence  also  that  the 
devastation  is  but  local.  We  are 
seldom  informed  of  simultaneous,  or 
nearly  simultaneous,  events  happening 
in  widely-separated  regions  of  the 
earth’s  surface.  Accordingly,  we  are 
seldom  led  to  dread  the  occurrence 
of  any  widely-devastating  series  of 
catastrophes. 

We  have  heard  a great  deal  lately 
of  certain  speculations — recently  ven- 
tilated by  an  American  philosopher — 
which  threaten  the  earth  with  com- 
plete annihilation.  According  to 
these  views  there  is  one  great  danger 
to  which  we  are  at  all  times  liable — 
the  risk,  namely,  that  some  large 
volcanic  vent  should  be  formed  be- 
neath the  bosom  of  ocean.  Through 


28 


ILLUSIONS  OF  THE  SENSES: 


this  vent  the  sea  would  rush  into  the 
interior  of  the  earth,  and  being  forth- 
with converted  into  steam  by  the 
intense  subterranean  heat,  would  rend 
the  massive  shell  on  which  we  live 
into  a thousand  fragments. 

Whether  it  is  possible  or  not  that 
such  an  event  as  this  should  take 
place,  I shall  not  here  stay  to  inquire. 
Let  it  suffice  that  the  risk — if  there  be 
any — is  no  greater  now  than  it  has 
been  any  time  during  thousands  of 
past  years. 

But  certainly,  if  there  is  any  source 
from  which  the  inhabitants  of  the 
earth  may  reasonably  dread  the  oc- 
currences of  widely  devastating  catas- 
trophes, it  is  from  earthquakes.  It  is 
related  that  for  full  six  months  after 
the  great  earthquake  of  Lisbon,  Dr. 
Johnson  refused  to  believe  in  the 
occurrence  of  so  terrible  a catastro- 
phe. “ He  spoke  half  jestingly,” 
Macaulay  thought — it  is  not  easy  to 
see  on  what  grounds.  To  us  it  seems 
far  more  probable  that  Johnson  heard 
with  natural  wonder  and  awe  of  the 
destructive  effects  of  this  fearful  con- 
vulsion ; and  that  for  awhile  he  could 
scarcely  believe  that  the  extent  of  the 
disaster  had  not  been  exaggerated. 
It  would  be  well  if,  indeed,  the 
powers  of  earthquakes  were  less  tre- 
mendous than  they  have  been  repeat- 
edly shown  to  be.  “ There  is,”  says 
Humboldt,  “ no  other  outward  mani- 
festation of  force  known  to  us — the 
murderous  inventions  of  our  own  race 
included — through  which,  in  the  brief 
period  of  a few  seconds  or  minutes,  a 
larger  number  of  human  beings  have 
been  destroyed  than  by  earthquakes.” 
Lightning  and  storm,  war  and  plague, 
are  but  weak  and  inefficient  agents  of 
destruction  in  comparison  with  the 
earth’s  internal  forces. 

And  as  earthquakes  surpass  all 
other  phenomena  as  agents  of  sudden 
destruction,  so  the  impression  which 
they  produce  on  those  who  for  the 
first  time  experience  their  effects  is 
peculiarly  and  indescribably  awful. 
Men  of  reputed  courage  speak  of  a 
feeling  of  “intolerable  dread”  pro- 
duced by  the  shocks  of  an  earthquake, 


“ even  when  unaccompanied  by  sub- 
terranean noises.”  The  impression 
is  not  that  of  simple  fear  but  a feeling 
of  absolute  pain.  The  reason  seems 
for  awhile  to  have  lost  the  power  of 
separating  real  from  imaginary  causes 
of  terror.  The  lower  animals,  also, 
are  thrown  into  a state  of  terror  and 
distress.  “ Swine  and  dogs,”  says 
Humboldt,  “ are  particularly  affected 
by  the  phenomenon  of  earthquakes.” 
And  he  adds  that  “ the  very  crocodiles 
of  the  Orinoco,  otherwise  as  dumb  as 
our  little  lizards,  leave  the  shaken  bed 
of  the  stream  and  run  bellowing  into 
the  woods.” 

Humboldt’s  explanation  of  the  pe- 
culiar sensations  of  alarm  and  awe 
produced  by  an  earthquake  upon 
those  who  for  the  first  time  experi- 
ence the  effects  of  the  phenomenon  is 
in  all  probability  the  correct  one. 
“The  impression  here  is  not,”  he 
says,  “the  consequence  of  the  recol- 
lection of  destructive  catastrophes 
presented  to  our  imagination  by  nar- 
ratives of  historical  events ; what 
seizes  us  so  wonderfully  is  the  dis- 
abuse of  that  innate  faith  in  the  fixity 
of  the  solid  and  sure-set  foundations 
of  the  earth.  From  early  childhood 
we  are  habituated  to  the  contrast 
between  the  mobile  element  water 
and  the  immobility  of  the  soil  on 
which  we  stand.  All  the  evidences  of 
our  senses  have  confirmed  this  belief. 
But  when  suddenly  the  ground  begins 
to  rock  beneath  us,  the  feeling  of  an 
unknown  mysterious  power  in  nature 
coming  into  operation  and  shaking 
the  solid  globe  arises  in  the  mind. 
The  illusion  of  the  whole  of  our 
earlier  life  is  annihilated  in  an 
instant.” 

Use  habituates  the  mind  to  the 
shocks  of  earthquake.  Humboldt 
found  himself  able  after  awhile  to  give 
a close  and  philosophic  scrutiny  to 
the  circumstances  attending  the  phe- 
nomenon which  had  at  first  impressed 
him  so  Startlingly.  And  he  tells  us 
that  the  inhabitants  of  Peru  think 
scarcely  more  of  a moderate  shock  of 
earthquake  than  is  thought  of  a hail- 
storm in  the  temperate  zone. 


AND  OTHER  ESSAYS. 


29 


Yet  the  annals  of  earthquakes  are 
sufficient  to  give  rise  to  a feeling  of 
dread,  founded,  not  merely  on  the 
novelty  of  the  event,  but  on  a knowl- 
edge of  the  powers  of  the  earth’s 
internal  heavings.  The  narratives  of 
some  of  the  great  earthquakes  afford 
fearful  evidence  on  this  point. 

In  the  first  shock  of  the  great 
earthquake  of  Lisbon  (November, 
1755)  the  city  was  shaken  to  its  foun- 
dations. The  houses  were  swung  to 
and  fro  so  violently  that  the  upper 
stories  fell  at  once,  causing  a terrible 
loss  of  life.  Thousands  rushed  to 
the  great  square  in  front  of  St.  Paul’s 
Church,  to  escape  the  reach  of  the 
tottering  ruins.  It  was  the  festival  of 
All  Saints,  and  all  the  churches  had 
been  crowded  with  worshippers.  But 
when  the  terrified  inhabitants  reached 
the  square,  they  found  that  the  great 
church  of  St.  Paul’s  was  already  in 
ruins,  and  the  immense  multitude 
which  had  thronged  its  sacred  pre- 
cincts were  involved  in  its  destruction. 
Such  of  the  congregations  of  the 
different  churches  as  had  escaped 
rushed  to  the  banks  of  the  Tagus  for 
safety.  There  were  to  be  seen  priests 
in  their -sacerdotal  vestments,  and  an 
immense  crowd  of  people  of  all  ranks 
and  ages,  praying  to  Heaven  for 
mercy.  As  they  prayed  there  came 
the  second  shock,  scarcely  less  terrible 
than  the  first.  The  church  on  the  top 
of  St.  Catherine’s  Hill  was  rocked  to 
and  fro  till  it  fell,  crushing  in  its  fall 
a great  multitude  which  had  sought 
that  height  for  safety. 

But  a far  more  terrible  catastrophe 
was  at  hand.  As  the  banks  of  the 
river  sounded  with  the  Miserere  of 
the  terrified  supplicants  who  had 
crowded  thither  for  safety,  there  was 
seen  to  pass  over  the  wide  expanse  of 
the  stream  (here  four  miles  broad)  a 
strange  heaving  swell,  though  no  wind 
stirred  the  air.  The  waters  seemed 
to  be  drawn  away  to  meet  a vast  wave 
which  was  now  first  observed  to  be 
bearing  down  upon  the  devoted 
crowd.  They  strove  to  fly,  but  the 
wave  swept  too  rapidly  onwards. 
The  whole  multitude  was  overwhelmed 


in  a moment.  A magnificent  quay, 
lately  built  at  a great  expense,  was 
engulfed  with  all  who  had  crowded 
on  it  for  refuge.  Numberless  vessels, 
also,  which  were  anchored  on  the 
river  and  were  now  full  of  terrified 
people — seeking  on  an  unstable  ele- 
ment the  security  which  the  solid 
earth  denied  them — were  sucked  down 
by  the  tremendous  wave,  and  not  a 
trace  of  them  was  ever  afterwards  seen. 

A third  shock  followed,  and  again 
the  river  was  swept  by  a gigantic  wave. 
So  violently  was  the  river  moved  that 
vessels  which  had  been  riding  at  an- 
chor in  deep  water  were  flung  upon 
the  dry  ground.  Other  shocks  and 
other  inroads  of  the  river-water  fol- 
lowed, each  working  fresh  destruction, 
insomuch  that  many  began  to  believe 
that  “ the  city  of  Lisbon  was  doomed 
to  be  entirely  swept  away  from  the 
face  of  the  earth.  ” 

It  would  be  out  of  place  to  describe 
here  at  length  how  fire  and  pestilence 
came  successively  to  complete  the  des- 
olation begun  by  the  earthquake’s 
ravages.  The  terrible  story  has  been 
narrated  elsewhere.  But  what  re- 
mains to  be  mentioned  gives  us  start- 
ling evidence  of  the  terrible  energy  of 
the  earth’s  subterranean  forces  : — 
The  mountains  Arrabida,  Estrella, 
Julio,  Marvan,  and  Cintra,  some  of  the 
largest  in  Portugal,  were  shaken  from 
their  very  foundations,  they  opened  at 
their  summits,  and  huge  masses  were 
flung  into  the  neighboring  valleys. 
Flames  and  smoke  were  emitted  from 
the  openings.  But  much  farther  away 
the  effects  of  the  great  convulsions 
were  experienced.  It  has  been  com- 
puted, says  Humboldt,  that  a portion  of 
the  earth’s  surface  four  times  greater 
than  the  whole  extent  of  Europe  was 
simultaneously  shaken.  On  the  coast 
of  Sweden  and  on  the  shores  of  the 
Baltic,  far  away  across  the  Atlantic  to 
the  Antigua  Islands,  at  Barbadoes  and 
Martinique,  and  still  further  off  in  the 
great  Canadian  lakes,  the  movement 
was  sensibly  felt.  Avast  wave  of  inky 
blackness  swept  over  the  West  Indian 
seas,  rising  twenty  feet  above  the  level 
of  the  highest  tides.  In  Algeria  the 


30 


ILLUSIONS  OF  THE  SENSES  : 


earth  was  as  violently  shaken  as  in 
Portugal,  and  eight  leagues  from  Mo- 
rocco a village  with  8000  inhabitants 
was  swallowed  up. 

The  shocks  felt  at  sea  were  so  vio- 
lent that  the  captains  who  experienced 
them  thought  their  ships  had  struck 
the  solid  ground.  A ship  120  miles 
to  the  west  of  St.  Vincent  was  so  vio- 
lently shaken  that  the  men  were  thrown 
half  a yard  perpendicularly  upwards 
from  the  deck.  Lakes  and  rivers  in 
England  were  strangely  agitated. 
The  water  in  Loch  Lomond  suddenly 
rose  against  the  banks  without  appar- 
ent cause,  and  then  as  suddenly  sub- 
sided— the  vibration  of  the  earth’s 
surface  having  traveled  from  Lisbon 
to  Scotland  at  the  rate  of  twenty  miles 
a minute  ! 

It  has  been  calculated  that  in  Lis- 
bon alone  60,000  persons  perished 
within  the  brief  space  of  six  minutes. 
But  there  have  been  other  earthquakes 
in  which  even  this  terrible  destruction 
of  life  has  been  surpassed.  In  1603, 
100,000  persons  fell  victims  to  the 
great  Sicilian  earthquake,  and  upwards 
of  300,000  persons  are  supposed  to 
have  perished  in  the  great  earthquakes 
which  desolated  Antioch  in  the  sixth 
and  seventh  centuries.  It  has  been 
estimated  that  within  the  last  4,000 
years  five  or  six  millions  of  human  be- 
ings have  perished  through  the  effects 
of  earthquakes. 

It  is  related  that  in  the  great  earth- 
quake of  1747  all  the  inhabitants  of 
the  town  of  Callao  were  destroyed, 
save  one.  The  man  who  escaped, 
standing  on  a fort  which  overlooked 
the  harbor,  saw  the  sea  retire  to  a dis- 
tance and  then  return  like  a vast  moun- 
tain in  height.  “He  heard  a cry  of 
Miserere  rise  from  all  parts  of  the 
city,”  and  in  a moment  all  was  silent 
— where  the  town  had  once  flourished 
there  was  a wide  sea.  But  the  same 
wave  which  overwhelmed  the  town 
drove  past  him  a small  boat,  into 
which  he  flung  himself,  and  so  was 
saved.* 

* It  must  be  remarked,  however,  that  Sir 
Charles  Lyell  estimates  the  number  of  the 
saved  at  200,  “ of  whom  twenty-two  were 


OUR  DUAL  BRAIN. 

In  a recent  lecture  at  the  Royal  In- 
stitution, Mr.  Horsley  offered  evi- 
dence (which  seems  to  me  not  very 
strong)  against  the  theory  of  the  dual- 
ity of  the  mind.  A person  who,  be- 
ing already  fairly  well  able  to  draw 
with  either  hand  separately,  attempts 
to  draw  simultaneously  two  different 
forms,  however  simple,  with  both 
hands,  is  tolerably  sure  to  fail.  Mr. 
Horsley  appears  to  think  that  failure 
always  results.  When  the  effort  is 
made,  he  says,  “ There  is  a very  def- 
inite sensation  in  the  mind  of  a con- 
flict that  is  going  on  in  the  cortex  of 
the  brain.  The  idea  of  the  circle  al- 
ternates with  that  of  the  triangle,  and 
the  result  of  this  confusion  in  the  in- 
tellectual and  sensorial  portions  of 
the  brain  is  that  both  motor  areas, 
though  remembering,  as  it  were,  the 
determination  of  the  experimenter  to 
draw  distinct  figures,  produce  a like 
confused  effect,  namely,  a circular  tri- 
angle and  a triangular  circle.” 

Mr.  Horsley  adds  that  if  the  draw- 
ing is  commenced  immediately  at  the 
sound  of  a signal  (as  should  always 
be  done  in  such  experiments),  it  will 
be  found  that  the  triangle  predomi- 
nates, while,  on  the  other  hand,  if  the 
two  figures  are  not  commenced  simul- 
taneously, the  one  last  begun  will  ap- 
pear most  distinctly  in  the  fused  re- 
sult, in  fact,  will  very  markedly  pre- 
dominate. He  reasons  upon  this  as 
follows  : — “ The  idea  of  a triangle  and 
circle  having  been  presented  to  the: 
intellect  of  the  sensory  centers,  the 
voluntary  effort  to  reproduce  them  is. 
determined  upon : now  if  we  had  a 
dual  mind,  and  if  each  hemisphere 
was  capable  of  acting  per  sef  then  we 
should  have  each  intellectual  area, 
sending  a message  to  its  own  motor 
area,  with  the  result  that  the  two  fig- 
ures would  be  distinct  and  correct,  not 
fused.” 

To  this  experimental  evidence  and 
to  its  interpretation  two  different  an- 

saved  on  a small  fragment  of  the  fort  of  Vera 
Cruz,  which  remained  as  the  only  memorial 
of  the  town  after  this  dreadful  inundation.” 


AND  OTHER  ESSAYS. 


31 


swers  can  be  given.  In  the  first  place, 
it  does  not  always  happen  that  the  at- 
tempt to  draw  two  different  objects 
simultaneously  fails  in  the  alleged 
manner.  Setting  on  one  side  as  prob- 
ably exaggerated  the  story  that  Sir 
Edwin  Landseer  drew  on  one  occa- 
sion a deer’s  head  with  one  hand, 
while  he  was  drawing  a landscape 
with  the  other,  I may  cite  from  my 
own  experience  a case  which  entirely 
invalidates  Mr.  Horsley’s  evidence. 
My  friend,  Professor  Edwin  Morse,  of 
Salem,  Mass.,  could  draw  simulta- 
neously, and  that,  too,  before  an  au- 
dience, two  different  objects  with 
either  hand.  Or,  he  would  draw  an 
object  with  one  hand,  and  at  the  same 
time  write  the  names  of  the  parts  of 
the  object  with  the  other.  With  prac- 
tice much  skill  may  be  acquired  in 
this  ambidextrous  work. 

Here  is  a simple  experiment  to 
show  the  effect  of  practice.  Try  for 
the  first  time  to  write  a word  of  so 
many  letters  while  you  spell  aloud, 
letter  by  letter,  another  word  contain- 
ing the  same  number  of  letters.  At 
first  you  are  almost  sure  (perhaps 
quite  sure)  to  fail.  But  after  a few 
trials  what  had  seemed  impossible  be- 
comes feasible,  and  presently  it  be- 
comes quite  easy. 

Then,  even  if  it  were  proved  that 
we  cannot  do  two  different  things  at 
once  (apart  from  cases  where  either 
or  both  is  done  automatically),  this 
would  no  more  prove  that  the  brain  is 
not  dual  than  our  inability  to  use  the 
two  eyes  simultaneously  to  do  differ- 
ent work  would  prove  that  we  have 
not  dual  vision. 

As  a matter  of  fact  we  are  able  to 
prove  very  easily  that  vision  is  double, 
by  alternately  closing  and  opening 
either  eye.  We  cannot  make  any  cor- 
responding experiment  with  the  brain. 
We  do  not  know  even  that,  when  we 
are  trying  to  do  simultaneously  two 
different  things  the  two  different  sides 
of  the  brain  are  called  into  action. 
We  have  positively  no  means  of  de- 
termining whether  one  side,  or  the 
other  side,  or  both  sides  of  the  brain 
shall  be  used,  or  of  knowing  whether 


they  are  used.  Even  in  those  cases 
where  marked  alternations  of  charac- 
ter, accompanied  or  preceded  by 
marked  cerebral  phenomena,  show 
unmistakably  that  two  different  parts 
of  the  brain  may  alternate  in  the  reg- 
ulation of  actions  and  even  of  char- 
acter, the  person  thus  dually  minded 
and  charactered  is  perfectly  power- 
less as  to  the  particular  mental  side 
of  him  which  shall  come  uppermost 
(or  act  alone)*  He  often  does  not 
even  know  that  he  is  passing  or  has 
passed  from  one  state  to  the  other. 

Since,  however,  we  are  absolutely 
certain  that  each  eye  does  its  work,, 
while  we  are  absolutely  unable  to 
make  them  work  separately  yet  sim- 
ultaneously— to  make  one  eye  work 
at  long  range,  for  example,  and  the 
other  at  short  range,  the  argument 
used  by  Mr.  Horsley  in  regard  to  the 
brain  is  altogether  without  force. 

If  any  one  could  make  his  two  eyes, 
work  separately,  I should  be  the  one 
to  do  it,  for  my  left  eye  is  perma- 
nently limited  to  work  at  short  focal 
distances,  while  the  right  eye  has  the 
usual  range.  Yet,  not  only  am  I 
powerless  to  make  my  two  eyes  work 
separately  and  simultaneously,  but  I 
am  very  seldom  conscious  of  the  fact 
that  the  left  eye  is  in  reality  present- 
ing to  the  brain  (so  to  speak)  a very 
different  picture  from  that  which  is 
presented  by  the  right  eye. 

I remained  unconscious  of  the  dif- 
ference between  the  focal  lengths  of 
my  two  eyes,  marked  though  it  is  (in- 
somuch, that  for  ordinary  distances 
my  left  eye  is  almost  blind),  till  I was 
about  twenty ; at  least  I know  it  must 
have  been  more  than  twenty-six  years 
ago  that  I detected  the  peculiarity. 
I was  in  church  one  Sunday  evening, 
listening  or  not  listening  to  a rather 
dreary  sermon,  in  which  a person 
whom  I had  reason  for  regarding  little 
was  enjoining  duties  which  I had  long 
learned  to  regard  a great  deal ; and 
being  naturally  inattentive  to  him,  I 
attended  to  other  things.  Now,  there 
were  in  front  of  me  two  bright  lights, 
and  I noticed  to  the  right  of  them 
two  blurred  lights,  looking  as  large  as. 


32 


ILLUSIONS  OF  THE  SENSES: 


the  moon,  where  assuredly  no  lights 
were.  I looked  at  another  group  of 
lights,  three  of  them — and  lo,  to  the 
right  of  them  also,  a group  of  three, 
similarly  arranged,  blurred  lights.  I 
closed  my  left  eye,  and  could  see  only 
the  bright  lights  ; I closed  my  right 
eye  and  could  see  only  the  blurred 
lights.  That  was  all  my  left  eye  could 
do  in  the  way  of  showing  those  lights. 

Thus,  for  the  first  time  in  my  life, 
I learned  that  so  far  as  distant  ob- 
jects were  concerned  I was  almost 
blind  of  one  eye.  But  I soon  found 
that  my  left  eye  was  by  no  means 
blind  for  near  objects ; on  the  con- 
trary, it  was  and  is  very  keen  for 
them.  Yet  I cannot  make  my  eyes, 
different  though  they  thus  are,  work 
separately,  except  in  an  imperfect 
sort  of  way,  akin  to  the  way  in  which, 
in  Mr.  Horsley’s  experiment,  one 
hand  makes  a circular  triangle  while 
the  other  makes  a triangular  circle.  I 
am  well  assured  my  vision  is  double, 
as- all  men  are;  nay,  in  my  case  vision 
is  even  of  two  kinds  with  the  two 
eyes : yet  I have  precisely  the  sort  of 
evidence  respecting  my  two  eyes 
which  Mr.  Horsley  regards  as  evi- 
dence of  unity. 

Mr.  Horsley  cites  a singular  illus- 
tration of  the  duality  of  the  mind,  of 
which,  however,  he  endeavors  to  dis- 
pose. The  case  is  so  remarkable, 
and,  just  now  when  all  sorts  of  foolish 
superstitions  are  as  rife  as  ever,  so  in- 
structive, that  I give  its  details  here 
pretty  nearly  in  full,  as  recorded  by 
Prof.  Ball,  of  Paris.  He  tells  us  that 
a young  man,  a patient  of  his,  one 
morning  heard  himself  addressed  by 
name,  and  yet  could  see  no  one.  He 
replied  to  this  invisible,  and  in  reality 
imaginary,  interlocutor ; and  a con- 
versation followed,  in  the  course  of 
which  the  ghostly  visitor  informed 
him  that  he — the  visitor — rejoiced  in 
the  name  of  Gabbage.  After  this,  he 
was  often  favored  with  visits  from  M. 
Gabbage.  Unfortunately,  the  sugges- 
tions of  M.  Gabbage  were  generally 
open  to  objection.  At  one  time  M. 
Gabbage  urged  the  patient  to  give  an 
overdose  of  chlorodyne  to  a friend’s 


child ; at  another,  his  idea  was  that  the 
young  man  would  do  well  to  jump  out 
of  a second-floor  window. 

Prof.  Ball  thought  — naturally 
enough — that  the  young  man  needed 
watching.  It  was  presently  found 
that  the  patient  was  suffering  from 
one-sided  hallucination ; that  is  to 
say,  a strong  but  false  impression,  af- 
fecting one  side  only  of  the  brain,  ap- 
peared to  come  from  some  external 
cause,  the  healthy  side  rejecting  the 
evidence  as  false.  (Without  doubt 
many  superstitions,  many  false  relig- 
ious beliefs,  and  also  many  crimes, 
have  been  suggested  in  this  way.) 

Mr.  Horsley  finds  nothing  in  this 
or  similar  cases  to  suggest  the  duality 
of  the  brain ; but  I take  it  that  the 
evidence  is  precisely  analogous  to 
that  which  showed  me  not  only  the 
duality  but  the  diversity  of  my  own 
visual  powers.  Usually,  of  course, 
the  two  sides  of  the  brain  would  give 
the  same  sort  of  evidence  respecting 
external  objects  ; just  as — usually — 
the  two  eyes  do : but  in  certain  cases 
one  side  of  the  brain  is  defective  or 
peculiar  in  some  way  or  other,  and  so 
gives  evidence  which  the  better  and 
sounder  side  rejects ; just  as  in  my 
case  one  eye  gave  evidence  of  large 
diffuse  lights  where  I knew,  from  the 
sound  evidence  of  my  better  eye,  that 
small  bright  flames  were  burning. 
The  analogy  seems  as  perfect  as  it 
can  be  ; and  the  necessary  conclusion 
is  that  the  brain’s  action,  in  ordinary 
cases,  is  as  essentially  dual  as  the  ac- 
tion of  the  eyes  in  vision. 


A NEW  STAR  IN  A STAR 
CLOUD. 

The  discovery  of  a new  star  in  the 
midst  of  the  Great  Nebula  in  Androm- 
eda must  be  regarded  as  one  of  the 
most  remarkable  astronomical  events 
of  the  age.  It  is  true  that  great 
changes  have  ere  now  been  recognized 
in  stars  lying  within  nebulous  clouds. 
The  star  Eta  Argfis  for  example,  which 
lies  in  the  midst  of  that  wonderful 


AND  OTHER  ESSAYS. 


33 


mass  of  luminous  gas  called  the  Key- 
hole Nebula  in  Argo,  has  changed  so 
marvelously  in  luster  since  it  was 
first  catalogued  as  a fourth  magnitude 
star  as  to  present  a case  correspond- 
ing so  far  as  the  star  is  concerned 
with  the  sudden  appearance  of  the 
new  star  in  the  Andromeda  Nebula. 
For  Eta  Argus  sank  from  the  fourth 
magnitude  to  the  sixth,  then  rose  rap- 
idly to  the  second,  and  after  remain- 
ing for  some  time  at  that  magnitude 
increased  almost  suddenly  in  splendor 
until  it  rivaled  Canopus  and  was  sur- 
passed only  by  Sirius.  Undoubtedly 
to  an  observer  set  at  such  a distance 
that  Eta  Argus  when  thus  resplendent 
would  have  appeared  only  as  an 
eighth  magnitude  star,  like  the  new 
star  in  Andromeda,  Eta  with  its  pres- 
ent light  of  a sixth  magnitude  star 
would  be  altogether  invisible.  So 
that  viewed  from  that  imagined  dis- 
tance Eta  Argus  when  it  rose  to  its 
greatest  splendor  would  have  appeared 
as  a new  star,  and  as  it  faded  out  of 
view  would  come  to  be  regarded  as 
having  been  but  a temporary  star. 

Again,  the  star  which  appeared  in 
Cygnus  in  1876  must  be  regarded  as 
a star  which  had  suddenly  shone  out 
in  a nebula,  although  no  nebula  had 
been  known  where  the  star  appeared. 
For  when  that  star  had  disappeared 
there  still  remained  a blue  planetary 
nebula  in  the  place  which  the  star 
had  occupied.  And  this  nebula  was 
and  is  so  faint  that  one  can  readily 
understand  it  having  escaped  notice 
before.  No  one,  I imagine,  can  doubt 
that  the  nebula  which  is  seen  there 
now  existed  there  before  the  star  ap- 
peared. 

The  stars  in  the  great  Fish-mouth 
Nebula  in  Orion  exhibit  also  a certain 
degree  of  variability,  which,  though 
not  so  striking  as  the  appearance  of 
“new  stars,”  is  in  reality  a phenome- 
non of  the  same  sort.  For  every  so- 
called  “new  star”  may  be  regarded 
as  a variable  of  an  unusually  irregular 
kind. 

But  in  all  these  cases  the  star  which 
shone  with  variable  luster,  or  which 
for  a time  appeared  as  a new  star,  has 


been  in  the  midst  of  a gaseous  nebula. 
The  great  nebula  in  Andromeda  has 
always  been  regarded  as  a stellar  neb- 
ula, although  it  has  never  been  resolved 
into  stars.  Under  spectroscopic  ex- 
amination it  presents  the  rainbow- 
tinted  streak  crossed  by  absorption 
lines  which  indicates  the  existence  of 
glowing  solid  or  liquid  or  highly  com- 
pressed vaporous  matter  shining 
through  absorptive  vapors.  I remem- 
ber Dr.  Huggins  describing  the  spec- 
trum of  this  object  to  me,  during  a 
visit  which  I paid  to  his  observatory 
in  1866 ; and  he  then  said  that  the 
spectrum  differed  only  from  that  of  a 
star,  in  being  rather  sharply  cut  off  at 
the  red  end,  as  if  through  the  action  of 
vaporous  envelopes  more  powerfully 
absorptive  of  red  light  than  the  vapors 
around  our  sun  and  most  other  stars. 

In  a rather  carelessly-written  para- 
graph in  the  Times  of  Saturday  last,* 
manifestly  by  a person  not  well  ac- 
quainted with  astronomical  facts,  the 
new  star  is  spoken  of  as  if  it  gave 
support  to  Laplace’s  nebular  theory. 
In  reality  the  appearance  of  the  star 
is  most  strongly  opposed  to  that  the- 
ory, for  the  simple  reason  that  all  the 
processes  involved  in  Laplace’s  nebu- 
lar theory  are  slowly-acting  ones,  while 
the  appearance  of  a new  star  where  a 
star  had  not  before  been  visible,  sig- 
nifies events  of  a catastrophic  nature. 
Moreover  the  theory  of  Laplace,  in 
the  form  in  which  it  was  presented, 
cannot  be  maintained  by  any  one  ac- 
quainted with  the  laws  of  physics.  A 
vast  disc  of  gaseous  matter,  extending 
beyond  the  orbit  of  Neptune,  but  con- 
taining no  more  matter  than  there  is 
in  the  whole  solar  system  would  not 
have  the  slightest  cohesion  among  its 
various  parts.  To  conceive  of  it  as 
rotating  like  a single  mass  is  to  im- 
agine the  impossible.  One  may  say 
indeed  of  Laplace’s  nebular  hypothe- 
sis— which  was  very  properly  regarded 
by  himself  as  but  a guess — that  as- 
tronomers suppose  it  physically  pos- 
sible and  physicists  suppose  it  astro- 


* This  article  was  first  published  Sept,  n, 
1885. 


34 


ILLUSIONS  OF  THE  SENSES  : 


nomically  possible  : but  no  one  who 
combines  a knowledge  of  both  astron- 
omy and  physics  can  accept  it  in  the 
wide  generality  of  its  original  form. 

What  the  new  star  really  does  throw 
light  upon,  and  light  of  a very  clear 
and  unmistakable  sort,  is  not  the  the- 
ory of  the  solar  system,  but  the  theory 
of  the  stellar  system — that  grand  gath- 
ering of  stars,  star  clusters,  star-clouds, 
and  star-streams,  which  we  call  the 
galaxy. 

If  there  was  one  member  of  the 
family  of  nebulae  which  was  still  sup- 
posed to  remain  possibly  an  external 
galaxy,  after  all  the  evidence  which 
had  been  collected  to  show  that  neb- 
ulae belong  to  our  own  galaxy,  it  was 
the  great  nebula  in  Andromeda, — the 
transcendently  beautiful  queen  of  the 
nebulae  as  the  old  astronomers  enthu- 
siastically called  it.  Mr.  Herbert 
Spencer  observed  as  far  back  as  1859 
or  i860,  in  his  fine  essays  on  the  Neb- 
ular Hypothesis  in  the  Westminster 
Review,  that  the  theory  according  to 
which  numbers  of  the  resolvable  neb- 
ulae are  external  star  systems  is  abso- 
lutely untenable.  He  pointed  to  this 
fatal  objection,  that  Sir  William  Her- 
schel’s  most  powerful  telescopes  failed 
to  resolve  the  remoter  portions  even 
of  our  own  galaxy.  How  then  could 
they — or  indeed  in  many  cases  much 
weaker  telescopes — by  any  possibility 
resolve  galaxies  lying  far  beyond  its 
limits.  A resolvable  nebula  which 
has  an  apparent  greatest  diameter  of 
a quarter  of  a degree  of  arc,  would  be 
a very  large  one  indeed  ; yet  even  one 
of  that  apparent  size  must  lie  at  a dis- 
tance exceeding  its  own  diameter 
about  230  times,  and  exceeding  there- 
fore (supposing  that  nebula  a galaxy 
like  our  own  in  size)  the  distance  of 
the  outskirts  of  our  galaxy  from  us, 
more  than  450  times.  This  would 
correspond  to  a diminution  in  the  lus- 
ter of  individual  stars  more  than  200,- 
000  times.  Now  Herschel  had  to 
withdraw  from  the  survey  of  the  re- 
motest parts  of  our  galaxy,  or  at  any 
rate  the  least  resolvable  parts  (for  my 
own  interpretation  of  their  irresolva- 
bility  does  not  assume  great  distance 


1 as  a necessary  point),  satisfied,  as  he 
said,  that  those  depths  are  unfathom- 
able. Irresolvable  nebulosity  foiled 
his  most  powerful  telescopes,  within 
the  limits  of  our  own  stellar  domain. 
How  preposterous,  then,  when  consid- 
ered a little,  the  belief  that  the  same 
telescope  which  failed  to  resolve  the 
outskirts  of  our  own  galaxy,  can  bring 
into  view  individual  stars  having  less 
than  the  200,000th  part  of  the  light  of 
those  remoter  suns  of  our  stellar 
system. 

Mr.  Herbert  Spencer  pointed  out 
another  fatal  objection,  in  Sir  W.  Her- 
schel’s  own  account  of  the  arrange- 
ment of  the  stellar  and  nebular  group- 
ings. For  Herschel  said  that  when- 
ever he  found  his  star  gauges  running 
poor,  he  would  call  out  to  his  elder 
sister,  Miss  Caroline  Herschel,  who 
acted  as  his  assistant,  “ Prepare  to 
write,  nebulae  are  about  to  appear.” 
This  peculiarity  of  arrangement  by 
which  nebulae  fit  in  where  stars  are 
sparsely  strewn,  and  vice  versa , must 
be  regarded  as  proof  positive  of  the 
association  between  nebulae  and  stars. 
Nebulae  must  belong,  then,  to  our  gal- 
axy. 

I myself  collected  some  forty  pieces 
of  evidence  as  to  the  structure  of  our 
galaxy,  by  which,  as  I believe,  the  old- 
fashioned  theory  (in  favor  of  which 
not  a single  direct  argument  has  ever 
been  adduced)  was  shown  to  be  ab- 
solutely untenable.  I may  remark  in 
passing  that  I propose  to  publish  in 
the  first  monthly  number  of  the  new 
series  of  Knowledge  a letter  which 
I addressed  to  Sir  John  Herschel  in 
1870,  wherein  the  greater  number  of 
the  arguments  on  which  the  objections 
to  the  old  theory  are  based  were 
briefly  indicated.  In  the  second  num- 
ber of  that  series  I propose  to  publish 
his  singularly  interesting  reply  to  that 
communication.  I feel  that  the  time 
has  come  to  make  known  precisely 
how  that  great  astronomer  viewed  the 
questionings  then  being  addressed  to 
the  theory  with  which — not  quite  cor- 
rectly— his  own  name  and  his  father’s 
have  been  associated. 

But  while  Mr.  Spencer’s  objections 


AND  OTHER  ESSAYS. 


(of  themselves)  sufficed  to  demonstrate 
the  utterly  untenable  nature  of  the 
theory  of  galaxies  of  stars  external  to 
our  own  stellar  system ; and  my  own 
more  labored  gathering  of  evidence 
on  the  subject  should  have  left  no 
doubt,  even  in  the  minds  of  those  least 
ready  to  recognize  the  force  of  reason- 
ing in  such  matters,  the  great  nebula 
in  Andromeda  was  in  some  degree 
outside  our  evidence. 

The  Andromeda  nebula  is  not  gas- 
eous but  manifestly  stellar ; yet  it  has 
not  been  resolved  into  stars.  Nor 
had  it  been  possible  to  show  how  far 
the  nebula  was  from  resolvability. 
Some,  using  very  powerful  telescopes 
on  the  nebula,  supposed  they  had  come 
very  near  to  resolving  it  into  discrete 
stars ; but  they  could  not  feel  sure  on 
such  a point.  For  anything  yet 
shown,  telescopes  a thousand  times 
more  powerful  than  the  great  Rosse 
telescope  (imagined  for  the  moment 
as  perfect  in  defining  power)  might 
have  failed  to  resolve  the  Andromeda 
nebula  into  stars. 

Therefore  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer’s 
first  objection,  fatal  against  all  re- 
solved or  partly-resolvable  nebulae, 
had  no  fatal  force  (it  had  considerable 
force  however)  against  the  Andromeda 
nebula.  Of  course  the  other  objection 
had  no  force  at  all  if  this  nebula  is 
once  regarded  as  exceptional.  Among 
all  my  own  objections  against  the 
theory  of  external  galaxies,  few  had 
much  force  against  the  Queen  of  the 
Nebulae,  and  certainly  none  were  ab- 
solutely decisive  against  this  great  ag- 
glomeration of  unquestionably  stellar 
material  being  an  external  galaxy. 

Now,  however,  it  need  hardly  be 
said,  the  question  is  disposed  of.  A 
star-cloud  cannot  possibly  be  an  ex- 
ternal galaxy  resembling  our  sun  if 
there  can  appear  in  it  suddenly  a star 
where  no  star  had  before  been  seen. 
Were  the  Andromeda  nebula  such  a 
galaxy  the  change  which  has  recently 
taken  place  in  it  (or  to  speak  more 
precisely,  the  change  of  which  the 
light-brought  news  has  recently 
reached  us)  would  correspond  to  such 
a change  in  our  galaxy  as  would  alter 


35 

its  whole  character.  A star  millions 
of  times  larger  than  any  orb  in  our 
galaxy  would  have  to  be  present  in  it 
— to  begin  with — and  then  after  being 
so  dull  as  to  give  no  more  light  than 
an  ordinary  sun — would  have  to  blaze 
out  suddenly  with  hundreds  of  thou- 
sands of  times  as  much  light  even  as 
the  splendid  Sirius  pours  forth,  to  pro- 
duce such  a change  of  aspect  in  our 
galaxy,  supposed  to  be  seen  from  the 
distance  of  the  Andromeda  nebula,  as 
has  actually  taken  place  in  that  star- 
cloud. 

The  theory  that  the  star-clouds,  or 
any  of  them,  are  external  galaxies  has 
received  a death-blow.  This  is  not 
saying  it  was  not  dead  before.  The 
blow  may  be  such  a one  as  Falstaff 
gave  the  dead  Percy : but  no  one  can 
mistake  its  force.  With  this  new 
wound  the  theory  has  no  longer  even 
the  semblance  of  life,  and  will  possi- 
bly disappear  ere  long  from  those 
cemeteries  for  defunct  theories,  the 
text-books ! 


MONSTER  SEA-SERPENTS. 

I have  been  gratified  and  rather 
amused  to  find  a short  article,  which 
I contributed  more  than  a year  since 
to  The  Newcastle  Weekly  Chronicle  on 
the  subject  of  a marine  monster  seen 
near  Panama,  appearing  in  the  very 
valuable  report  of  Professor  Spencer 
F.  Baird,  United  States  Commissioner 
of  Fish  and  Fisheries.  A genial  arti- 
cle in  the  New  York  Tribune  for  J an- 
uary  4,  1885,  presents  my  recognition 
of  this  marine  monster  and  defence  of 
the  sea-serpent  as  a tardy  admission 
on  the  part  of  science  that  there  may 
be  more  things  in  sea  and  land  than 
had  been  dreamt  of  in  an  unphilo- 
sophical  philosophy.  But  so  far  as 
I am  concerned  there  has  been  no 
“ ridicule,  followed  by  denial,  then  by 
doubt,  and  lastly  by  partial  accept- 
ance.” I have  always  been  a be- 
liever in  the  sea-serpent  of  Capt. 
McQuhae,  of  the  Dcedalus.  I was  a 
very  young  lad  when  his  report  of  the 


36 


ILLUSIONS  OF  THE  SENSES : 


strange  encounter  first  appeared  ; but 
it  seemed  to  me  then,  and  it  seems  to 
me  still,  that  the  sea  captain  had  much 
the  best  of  the  discussion  with  the 
representatives  of  science.  There  was 
that  cautious  naturalist  and  palaeon- 
tologist, Richard  Owen,  so  anxious  to 
disprove  the  sea-serpent  that  he  pict- 
ured to  himself  the  captain  and  officers 
of  a British  frigate  frightened  out  of 
their  wits,  and  out  of  one  at  least  of 
their  senses,  by  the  sight  of  a sea-ele- 
phant (as  he  tried  to  make  out)  rather 
far  away  from  its  native  abode,  and 
urging  its  course  as  fast  as  possible 
homeward.  Captain  McQuhae,  in  a 
report  to  the  Admiralty,  says  that  he 
and  his  officers  saw  a long-necked  sea 
monster  traveling  swiftly  in  the  teeth 
of  a ten-knot  breeze  on  the  surface  of 
the  sea,  so  quickly  that  he  could 
see  the  waves  frothing  against 
the  creature’s  chest.  It  passed  so 
near  that  he  could  have  distinctly 
seen  the  features  of  a man  at 
the  distance.  He  and  his  officers  had 
a good  view  of  the  creature.  (For  a 
wonder,  they  were  not  possessed  by 
the  customary  desire  to  shoot  it,  a 
desire  which  speaks  as  honorably  of 
the  human  race  as  the  saying  of  the 
North  Country  miner  immortalized 
by  Leech,  who,  seeing  a stranger, 
thought  it  due  welcome  to  “ ’eave 
5arf  a brick  at  un.”)  They  rejected 
the  sea-elephant  with  derision,  as  en- 
tirely inconsistent  with  what  they  had 
clearly  seen ; while  the  idea  of  their 
being  frightened — well,  Americans  in 
old  times  tackled  a few  of  our  British 
frigates  with  greater  or  less  success, 
but  they  did  not  find  our  seamen  quite 
so  timorous  as  to  be  likely  to  tremble 
in  their  shoes  at  the  sight  even  of  an 
extra  large  sea-elephant.  Yet  Prof. 
Owen  persisted  in  his  belief  that  the 
Dcedalus  sea-serpent  story  was  not 
worthier  of  credence  than  a story 
about  ghosts.  That  particular  ghost 
he  thought  he  had  laid. 

Since  then  all  sorts  of  explanations 
of  sea-serpent  stories  have  been  ad- 
vanced. Because  one  captain  has 
mistaken  a lot  of  floating  sea-wreck 
.half  a mile  away  for  a sea  monster, 


therefore  the  story  of  a sea  creature 
seen  swiftly  advancing  against  wind 
and  sea,  at  a distance  of  less  than  200 
yards,  meant  nothing^more  than  mis- 
understood sea-weed.  Another  mis- 
takes a flight  of  birds  in  the  distance 
or  a shoal  of  porpoises,  or  even  a 
range  of  hills  beyond  the  horizon, 
for  some  sea-sepentine  monster,  and 
forthwith  other  accounts,  however 
manifestly  inconsistent  with  such 
explanations,  are  regarded  as  ex- 
plained away.  Then,  worst  of  all, 
some  idiot  invents  a sea-serpent  to 
beguile  his  time  and  find  occupation 
for  his  shallow  pate,  and  so  soon  as 
the  story  is  shown  to  be  only  a story, 
men  of  sense  and  standing,  as  incapa- 
ble of  the  idiocy  of  inventing  sea- 
monsters  as  I am  of  inventing  a 
planet,  are  supposed  to  have  amused 
their  leisure  by  sending  grave  reports 
of  non-existent  sea-monsters  to  men 
under  whom  they  (the  seamen,  not 
the  sea-monsters)  held  office,  or  by 
taking  oath  before  magistrates  that 
they  had  seen  sea  creatures  which 
they  had  invented,  and  by  parallel 
absurdities. 

All  this  has  been  done  m the  case 
of  the  sea-serpent,  as  something  akin 
to  it  was  long  since  done  in  the  case 
of  the  cameleopard,  and  later  in  the 
case  of  the  gorilla.  Much  earlier 
Herodotus  had  been  called  the  Father 
of  Lies  instead  of  the  Father  of  His- 
tory, because  of  wonders  related  by 
him  which  have  since  been  shown  to 
be  facts.  The  poor  (in  intellect  and 
veracity)  are  always  with  us  ; and 
they  can  never  admit  that  anything 
exists  outside  what  they  know,  or 
understand  how  any  traveler  in  little 
known  regions  can  fail  to  lie  lustily 
when  he  comes  home  again.  Among 
the  creatures  thus  specially  ridiculed 
the  monster  earth-worm  described  by 
Rapp,  some  forty  years  ago,  was  spe- 
cially ridiculed,  and  those  who  believed 
in  it,  or  declined  utterly  to  reject  it, 
were  sneered  at  just  as  those  who 
recognize  the  reasonableness  of  the 
sea-serpent  are  laughed  at  now. 
Rapp  said  he  had  seen  in  South 
Africa  a monstrous  earth-worm,  sev- 


AND  OTHER  ESSAYS. 


37 


eral  feet  in  length.  One  of  these  he 
described  as  6 ft.  2 in.  long,  and  pro- 
portionately thick.  The  measurement 
was  regarded  as  not  worthier  of 
credence  than  Gulliver’s  precise  state- 
ments of  the  height  of  Lilliputian  and 
Brobdingnagian  animals.  The  ab- 
surdity and  impossibility  of  the  thing 
was  abundantly  proved.  A worm  of 
the  ordinary  kind  averages,  let  us  say, 
6 in.  in  length.  Here,  if  this  lying 
traveler  was  to  be  believed,  was  an 
animal  more  than  twelve  times  as 
long,  and  therefore  some  1,800  times 
as  large.  Now,  the  ordinary  boa- 
constrictor  is  about  eighteen  feet 
long.  Multiply  his  length  by  twelve, 
and  we  get  a serpent  of  216  feet  in 
length.  Credat  judceus , &c.  Rapp 
was  demonstrably  a vendor  of  lies — 
so,  at  least,  said  the  young  buccaneers 
of  the  press.  Well,  there  is  now  in 
the  Zoological  Gardens  in  London  a 
living  specimen  of  the  species  de- 
scribed by  Rapp.  It  is  not  one  of 
the  largest.  Indeed,  these  creatures 
are  hard  to  catch  and  keep  alive ; and 
probably  the  biggest  are  the  most 
difficult  to  secure.  They  are  de- 
scribed as  “ fairly  abundant  in  the 
neighborhood  of  Port  Elizabeth  and 
other  parts  of  Cape  Colony,”  but  they 
keep  out  of  sight  unless  heavy  rains 
drive  them  out  of  their  holes,  when 
hundreds  of  them  can  be  seen  crawl- 
ing about,  but  they  usually  perish 
soon  after  thus  visiting  the  surface. 
The  specimen  at  the  Zoological  Gar- 
dens is  about  five  feet  long,  however, 
so  that  it  is  quite  a good-sized  worm. 
Here,  then,  is  a case  where  a creature, 
the  description  of  which  excited  as 
much  ridicule  as  that  of  the  sea-ser- 
pent, is  found  not  only  to  exist  in 
large  numbers,  but  to  be  amenable  to 
the  customary  treatment  extended  by 
our  kindly  race  to  the  inferior  races  : 
we  have  captured  a specimen  and 
keep  it  on  show. 

Yet  those  who  formerly  laughed  at 
the  earth-worm  laugh  now  about  the 
fancied  sea-serpent.  They  laugh  so 
consumedly,  and  make  so  much  noise 
over  it — the  laughter  of  such  folk 
being  “as  the  crackling  of  thorns 


under  a pot  ” — that,  as  my  friend  Mr. 
W.  Mattieu  Williams  points  out,  and 
as  I can  confirm,  “ much  valuable 
evidence  concerning  the  sea-serpent 
is  suppressed  by  the  flippant  sneering 
of  the  class  of  writers  who  require  no 
other  qualification  than  ignorance  of 
the  subject  on  which  they  write. 
Scores,  perhaps  hundreds,  of  trust- 
worthy mariners  of  all  ranks,  in  both 
the  naval  and  mercantile  services, 
have  seen  what  they  believe  to  be 
such  a creature,  but  they  refuse  to 
publish  any  account  of  their  observa- 
tions, knowing  they  will  be  insulted, 
and  publicly  gibbeted  as  fools  and 
liars  if  they  do.” 

The  foolish  laughed  in  the  same 
way  over  the  kraken,  as  you  point 
out,  and  the  monster  they  rejected  as 
impossible  has  been  killed  and  meas- 
ured. Whether  the  sea-serpent,  or 
any  creature  whose  prey  is  chiefly 
sought  at  a considerable  distance 
below  the  surface,  will  ever  be  cap- 
tured or  killed  is  very  doubtful.  But 
their  existence  ought  never  to  have 
been  regarded  as  doubtful  after  the 
evidence  gathered  in  Massachusetts 
in  1817,  and  the  report  of  the  captain 
of  the  Dcedalus.  There  are  probably 
several  varieties  of  sea-creatures 
which  look  like  serpents,  and  among 
these  varieties  some  may  quite  proba- 
bly be  really  serpentine.  But  some 
of  the  supposed  sea-serpents  must 
have  really  propelled  themselves 
otherwise  than  as  serpentine  sea- 
creatures  do.  For  they  moved  rap- 
idly along  the  surface  without  percep- 
tible undulations,  and  nothing  but 
concealed  paddles  could  have  urged 
them  on  in  this  way.  In  my  article 
on  “ Strange  Sea- Creatures,”  which 
appeared  eleven  years  ago  in  The 
Gentleinciri s Magazi?ie,  several  singu- 
lar inhabitants  of  the  sea — and  in 
particular  a monstrous  skate  seen  in 
the  East  Indies — are  described,  and 
evidence  given  to  show  that  even 
among  comparatively  familiar  species, 
new  varieties  are  from  time  to  time 
being  discovered.  Thus,  though  no 
sea-serpent  so  large  as  the  Sea  Orm 
or  Sea  Worm,  described  by  Bishop 


38 


ILLUSIONS  OF  THE  SENSES: 


Pontoppidan  as  six  hundred  feet  in 
length,  have  as  yet  been  seen,  it  does 
not  follow  that  none  such  exist,  albeit, 
I cannot  doubt  that  the  good  Bishop’s 
accounts  are  very  largely  exaggerated. 
He  was  not  quite  so  foolish  as  the 
modern  critic,  who,  though  he  per- 
haps has  never  left  his  native  town, 
undertakes  to  contradict  men  who 
describe  what  they  have  seen.  But  I 
fear  he  erred  as  far  in  the  opposite 
direction.  The  boa-constrictor  and 
the  condor  have  been  described  in 
such  terms  by  comparatively  modern 
travelers  (as  Humboldt  has  shown) 
as  would  suggest  creatures  akin  to 
the  serpent  which  went  for  Sindbad, 
and  the  roc  which  also  adorns  Sind- 
bad’s  narrative  and  appears  elsewhere 
in  tales  of  the  East.  But  to  exagger- 
ate is  one  thing,  to  invent  is  another. 
The  man  who  is  foolish  enough  to  lie 
about  his  traveling  experiences  is  not 
capable  of  inventing  a new  animal 
worth  five  minutes’  consideration ; 
but,  on  the  other  hand,  the  man  who, 
being  sensible,  is  honest  and  truthful, 
is  yet  very  apt  to  err  in  the  way  of 
unintentional  exaggeration.  I think 
poor  Capt.  Drevar’s  narrative  of  a 
long-necked  sea  monster  which  cap- 
tured in  its  folds  and  took  down  a 
sperm  whale  was  a little  exaggerated, 
though  he  and  his  mates  swore  to  the 
truth  of  the  story  before  a magistrate, 
and  he  himself  was  most  unfairly 
punished  by  his  employers  for  telling 
what  he  had  seen — he  was,  in  fact, 
ruined  for  life.  (“I  would  not  tell 
about  it,”  said  an  old  salt  to  Capt. 
Drevar,  “ if  I saw  five  hundred  sea- 
sarpints.”)  But  I no  more  believed 
that  these  men  would  have  invented 
such  an  animal  if  they  could,  or  could 
have  invented  it  if  they  would,  than  I 
believe  that  an  utterly  ignorant  man 
could  have  devised  the  famous  Lunar 
Hoax — the  clever  story  respecting  a 
powerful  telescope  showing  living 
creatures  in  the  moon.  Yet  that 
story  did  not,  as  was  alleged,  take  in 
Arago ; no  one  acquainted  with  opti- 
cal laws  could  have  been  deceived  by 
it  for  an  instant.  To  imagine  that 
sailors  could  accomplish  the  far  more 


difficult  feat  of  inventing  a new  kind 
of  animal,  without  immediately  expos- 
ing their  ignorance  to  every  one 
acquainted  with  the  laws  of  compara- 
tive anatomy,  is  to  imagine  the  impos- 
sible. 


THE  ORIGIN  OF  COMETS. 

Encke’s  comet  has  returned  to  our 
neighborhood,  and  is  now  (February, 
1885)  under  observation.  Yet  to  all 
ordinary  appearance  our  skies  are  un- 
changed. Those  who  associate  the  re- 
turn of  a comet  with  the  appearance  of 
an  awe-inspiring  object,  with  long, 
sword-like  tail  brandished  athwart  the 
heavens,  like  those  comets  which  have 
in  past  and  recent  ages  terrified  the 
nations,  are  disappointed  when  they 
hear  that  the  comet  of  which  the 
papers  speak,  and  which  Professor 
Young  re-discovered  a few  days  ago, 
and  our  telescopists  are  carefully  ob- 
serving, is  one  which  cannot  even  be 
seen  without  telescopic  aid.  Yet  to 
the  student  of  astronomy  the  tri- 
umph is  greater  when  one  small 
comet  is  caught  in  the  toils  of  mathe- 
matical analysis,  and  detected  as  it 
advances  along  its  return  track,  than 
when  the  most  glorious  new  comet 
blazes  in  our  skies,  and  by  rapid 
changes  of  position  and  of  form  at- 
tracts the  admiring  attention  of  all 
men. 

I propose  to  make  the  return  of 
Encke’s  comet — the  comet  of  shortest 
period  known — the  text  for  some  re- 
marks about  the  theories  of  comets 
more  or  less  in  vogue  among  astron- 
omers, and  especially  those  theories 
which  relate  to  the  origin  of  these 
bodies,  or  at  least  their  introduction 
into  our  solar  system. 

It  may  be  remembered  that  at  the 
last  meeting  of  the  American  Associ- 
ation for  the  Advancement  of  Science, 
Professor  Young  touched  on  what  he 
called  the  received  theory  of  the  ori- 
gin of  comets,  and  what  he  admitted 
was  a valid  objection  of  mine  against 
that  theory. 


AND  OTHER  ESSAYS. 


39 


What  Professor  Young  calls  the  re- 
ceived theory  is,  I take  it,  neither  a 
theory  nor  generally  received — it  only 
comes  in  company  with  a received 
theory.  Schiaparelli,  the  ingenious 
chief  of  the  observatory  of  Milan, 
threw  out,  in  1866,  the  idea  that  the 
bodies  which  produce  the  star-showers 
of  Aug.  10  and  11  (the  Tears  of  St. 
Laivrence  they  were  fancifully  called 
in  old  times)  are  attendants  on  the 
Comet  of  1862.  When  he  had 
shown,  which  was  an  easy  thing  to 
do,  that  the  apparent  movements  of 
those  falling  stars  on  the  stellar  heav- 
ens accord  with  the  theory  that  they 
are  moving  in  parallel  tracks,  touch- 
ing (at  any  rate)  the  orbit  of  that  com- 
et at  the  place  where  it  crosses  the 
earth’s  track  (a  point  passed  by  the 
earth  on  or  about  Aug.  10-11),  it  was 
felt  that  he  had  done  something  in 
support  of  his  hypothesis.  But  when 
Professor  Adams  had  shown,  which 
was  by  no  means  an  easy  thing  to  do, 
that  the  bodies  producing  the  display 
of  November  meteors  travel  in  the 
very  track  of  the  comet  of  1866 
(known  as  Tempel’s),  astronomers 
saw  that  Schiaparelli’s  case  was 
proved.  It  passed  thenceforward 
from  the  condition  of  a mere  specula- 
tion to  that  of  a received  theory. 

This  is  the  received  theory  about 
comets  and  meteors  which  every  as- 
tronomer who  can  understand  the  evi- 
dence accepts  without  hesitation — Me- 
teors are  bodies  which  travel  on  the 
tracks  of  comets.  More  than  that  has 
not  yet  been  shown,  and  more  than 
that  is  certainly  not  received  by  as- 
tronomers as  a body. 

But  Schiaparelli  suggested  more. 
He  threw  out  a speculation  concern- 
ing the  origin  of  comets  based  on  his 
established  theory  as  to  the  connec- 
tion between  comets  and  meteors. 
This  speculation  would  explain,  if  es- 
tablished, the  way  in  which  meteors 
travel  on  the  tracks  of  comets.  It 
ran  as  follows  : — Amidst  the  interstel- 
lar depths  are  flights  and  clouds  of 
meteoric  bodies,  which  from  time  to 
time  are  drawn  out  of  those  depths  by 
the  attractive  influence  of  the  sun. 


Were  the  sun  alone  in  the  universe 
they  would  be  drawn  toward  him, 
sweep  around  him  in  greater  or  less 
proximity  to  his  surface  according  to 
the  course  on  which  they  chanced  to 
be  drawn,  and  so  pass  out  again  to 
the  depths  from  which  they  came. 
But  as  the  sun  has  a family  of  attend- 
ant planets  and  some  of  these  are 
somewhat  stalwart  fellows,  many  of 
the  meteor-flights  drawn  sunwards 
are  so  acted  upon  by  the  disturbing 
influence  of  Jupiter,  or  Saturn,  or 
Uranus,  or  Neptune,  or  mayhap  some 
outer  and  still  unknown  members  of 
the  family  of  giant  planets,  that  they 
are  deflected  from  their  course  and 
thenceforward  travel  on  a closed  path 
— elliptic,  of  course — around  the  sun. 
The  place  where  the  deflection  took 
place  remains  thenceforward  a part  of 
the  comet’s  path,  which  therefore 
seems  to  associate  itself  with  the  path 
of  the  deflecting  planet,  in  such  sort 
that,  though  the  sun  is  the  chief  ruler 
of  the  comet,  the  planet  which  intro- 
duced it  into  the  solar  system  retains 
a sort  of  secondary  influence  over  the 
comet’s  movements.  Should  the 
comet  chance  to  revisit  the  scene  of 
deflection  when  the  planet  is  passing 
the  same  place,  potent  disturbing  in- 
fluences may  be  exerted  on  the  comet, 
which  may  even  send  it  wandering 
yet  once  more  into  the  domain  of  in- 
terstellar space  whence,  according  to 
this  speculation,  it  was  drawn. 

Now,  I pointed  out  more  than 
eleven  years  since  that  this  part  of 
Schiaparelli’s  imaginings  is  entirely 
without  foundation  in  known  facts. 
We  may  guess  that  the  interstellar 
depths  are  a sort  of  breeding-place 
for  comets  and  meteor  systems, — 
though  why  they  should  be  so  not 
even  Schiaparelli  has  ventured  a sug- 
gestion. We  may  imagine  that  in  the 
interstellar  depths  there  still  remain 
the  scattered  fragments  of  such  ma- 
terials as,  when  gathered  in,  had 
formed  our  solar  system  with  all  its 
worlds  ; though  why  any  such  frag- 
ments should  remain  there , instead  of 
responding  to  the  influences  which 
brought  their  fellows  to  the  neighbor. 


40 


ILLUSIONS  OF  THE  SENSES  : 


hood  of  our  system,  would  remain 
still  unexplained.  Only  five  or  six 
millions  of  years  would  be  required  to 
draw  in  matter  to  the  sun  from  half 
the  distance  separating  him  from  his 
nearest  neighbor  among  the  stars, 
and  our  earth’s  crust  tells  us  of  tens 
of  millions  of  years  already  passed 
since  the  sun  had  gathered  in  his 
mass  so  as  to  shine  as  a sun  upon  the 
earth.  But  we  may  concede  for  a 
moment  the  possibility  of  the  wander- 
ing meteor  flights  of  interstellar  space 
imagined  by  Schiaparelli.  How  are 
we  thereby  helped  to  an  interpreta- 
tion of  the  origin  of  meteor  systems 
now  in  attendance  on  the  sun?  Not 
a whit,  seeing  that  we  have  only  suc- 
ceeded in  replacing  one  difficulty  by 
another  still  greater. 

If  we  suppose  the  meteor  streams 
to  have  come  into  the  interstellar 
depths  from  beyond,  that  is  from  the 
domain  of  some  star,  we  have  re- 
moved our  difficulty  only  a step,  and 
not  a step  bringing  us  any  nearer  a 
solution.  That  other  star  is  a sun 
like  ours,  and  if  a meteor  system 
came  from  it  to  us,  we  have  the  same 
difficulty  in  understanding  how  the 
meteor  system  came  to  be  in  the 
neighborhood  of  that  sun  as  we  have 
in  understanding  it  as  belonging  for 
a while  to  our  own  sun.  One  may 
compare  this  attempt  at  a solution 
of  a really  serious  difficulty  to  Sir 
William  Thompson’s  well-known  at- 
tempt to  explain  the  origin  of  life  in 
our  planet.  This  he  did  by  surmis- 
ing that  millions  of  years  ago  another 
planet  was  the  abode  of  life,  that  that 
planet  came  unfortunately  into  collis- 
ion with  another  or  burst,  and  that 
some  of  the  fragments  after  flitting 
from  sun  to  sun  a few  times  chanced 
in  their  passage  through  our  solar 
system  to  encounter  our  earth,  where, 
falling  on  good  soil,  the  germs  brought 
forth  abundant  life  : development  did 
all  the  rest.  That  planet  may  have 
inherited  the  germs  of  life  from  an- 
other which  had  burst  or  collided  a 
few  millions  of  years  before,  and  so 
on  ; we  may  in  fact  adopt  a theory  of 
planetary  life  akin  to  the  theory  of  in- 


dividual life — omne  vivum  ex  ovo— 
and  say  every  live  planet  received  its 
life  from  a planet  which  was  full  of 
life,  but  burst  up.  Schiaparelli’s 
cometic  speculation  asserts  in  like 
manner  that  every  meteoric  system 
or  comet  now  associated  with  the  sun 
came  here  athwart  the  star  depths 
from  another  sun  with  which,  millions 
of  years  ago,  it  was  in  like  manner  as* 
sociated. 

All  this,  however,  is  not  scientific 
theorizing  but  speculation.  There  is 
no  evidence  in  support  of  Schiapa- 
relli’s supposition.  If  it  were  estab- 
lished we  should  be  as  far  off  as 
ever  from  knowing  the  real  origin  of 
comets.  But  lastly,  there  happens  to 
be  demonstrative  evidence  against 
the  theory : — 

Take  the  November  meteors,  whose 
path  crosses  that  of  Uranus  so  close- 
ly as  to  show  that  Uranus  was  the 
planet  which  introduced  this  partic- 
ular meteor  system,  if  the  theory  has 
in  it  any  truth  at  all.  The  Novem- 
ber meteors,  and  of  course  Tempel’s 
comet,  in  whose  track  they  travel, 
cross  the  path  of  Uranus  now  with  a 
velocity  of  1%  miles  per  second.  A 
meteor  coming  to  our  sun  from  inter- 
stellar space  would  cross  the  track 
of  Uranus,  if  it  chanced  to  come  in 
the  right  direction,  with  a velocity  of 
nearly  6 miles  per  second.  Uranus, 
then,  to  do  what  certainly  has  been 
done  if  Schiaparelli’s  idea  is  right, 
must  have  abstracted  a velocity  of 
4 y2  miles  per  second  from  every  one 
of  a flight  of  meteors  traveling  past 
it.  Now  it  may  be  barely  possible  (I 
doubt  if  it  is,  but  the  calculations 
necessary  are  too  abstruse  to  be  en- 
tered on  save  for  a very  special  pur- 
pose) for  Uranus  to  abstract  so  great 
a velocity  from  a body  traveling  past 
him.  If  Uranus  drew  a body  to  him- 
self from  interstellar  space,  no  other 
member  of  the  solar  system,  not  even 
the  sun,  interfering,  he  could  give  to 
the  approaching  body  a velocity  of 
1^/2  miles  per  second  ; but  he  could 
not  give  any  thing  like  this  velocity  to 
a body  rushing  along  by  him  with 
sun-imparted  velocities,  and  therefore 


AND  OTHER  ESSAYS. 


41 


exposed  for  a shorter  time  to  his  in- 
fluence. Moreover,  in  any  passage 
by  Uranus  some  part  of  the  velocity 
abstracted  or  added  in  one  part  of 
the  passage  would  be  restored  or 
taken  aWay  again  in  the  remaining 
part.  At  the  utmost,  Uranus  might 
abstract  from  a single  meteor  some 
4 miles  per  second  of  its  velocity 
of  6 miles  per  second.  But  Uranus 
could  not  possibly  produce  the  same 
effects  on  the  members  of  a flight  of 
meteors,  however  closely  we  may  con- 
ceive them  to  be  set.  Some  would 
have  their  velocities  much  less  effec- 
tively reduced.  And  the  deflections 
of  direction  would  be  also  altogether 
different.  Nothing  could  save  a me- 
teor-flight from  being  dispersed  along 
widely  divergent  paths  if  it  came  near 
enough  to  Uranus  to  have  the  motion 
of  any  of  its  members  sufficiently  af- 
fected to  make  them  travel  hencefor- 
ward in  such  an  orbit  as  is  actually 
pursued  by  the  November  meteors, 
which  all  travel  along  the  same  path. 

This  which  is  true  of  one  meteor 
system  or  comet  is  true  of  all.  Un- 
der no  conceivable  conditions  could  a 
meteor-flight  be  introduced  into  our 


solar  system  as  Schiaparelli  imagined. 
Hence  a different  theory  of  the  ori- 
gin of  the  families  of  comets  asso- 
ciated with  the  giant  planets  must  be 
adopted.  We  must  in  some  way  ad- 
mit that  every  comet  was  once  in  the 
neighborhood  of  one  of  the  giant 
planets  in  the  form  of  a closely-set 
flight  of  meteors.  This  being  so,  the 
natural  explanation  is  that  each  comet 
started  from  a planet, — by  a process 
akin  to  volcanic  ejection,  or  in  some 
such  way.  Now,  on  the  one  hand  the 
sun  does  eject  bodies  from  his  in- 
terior, in  mighty  eruptions  which  have 
been  actually  watched  ; and  the  plan- 
ets when  in  the  sunlike  state  may 
well  be  believed  to  have  done  like- 
wise ; and  on  the  other  hand  there  is 
evidence  to  show  that  even  our  small 
earth  once  possessed  the  power  of 
ejecting  meteoric  bodies  from  her  in- 
terior (Prof.  Ball  considers  that  some 
meteor-flights  still  in  existence  were 
earth-born). 

On  the  whole,  then,  the  view  seems 
suggested  that  comets  like  Encke’s 
were  ejected  from  the  interior  of  the 
planet  on  which  they  are  still  found 
to  be  dependent. 


CONTENTS. 


Illusions  of  the  Senses 

Animals  of  the  Present  and  the  Past 

Life  in  Other  Worlds 

Earthquakes 

Our  Dual  Brain 

A New  Star  in  a Star  Cloud 

Monster  Sea-Serpents 

The  Origin  of  Comets 


PAGE? 

I 


II 


13 

27 


32 

35 


3& 


CATALOGUE  OF  THE 

HUMBOLDT  LIBRARY. 

N.  B.  The  price  of  each  number  is  15  cents,  except  as  otherwise  stated. 
The  Catalogue  price  includes  postage. 

The  Library  is  published  1 monthly.  Price  to  subscribers  $1.50 
per  pear,  or  12  numbers.  Any  number  in  the  catalogue  sent  post-free 
on  receipt  of  the  price. 

Fractional  parts  of  a dollar  may  be  sent  in  the  form  of  postage  stamps. 

J.  FITZ&Ef&ALD,  PUBLI8MER, 

108  Chambers  Street,  Ne w 'York. 


No.  1.  higlit  Science  for  Leisure 
Hours  : A series  of  Familiar  Essays  on  Scien- 
tific Subjects.  By  Richard  A.  Proctor,  F.R.A.S. 
Contents  (in  part) The  Earth  a Magnet  ; the 
Secret  of  the  North  Pole  ; Our  Chief  Timepiece 
Losing  Time  ; Tornadoes  ; Influence  of  Marriage 
on  the  Death  Rate  ; Squaring  the  Circle  ; the  Use- 
fulness of  Earthquakes ; the  Forcing  Power  of 
Rain,  etc.,  etc. 

No.  2.  Tlie  Forms  of  Water  in  Clouds  and 
Rivers,  Ice  and  Glaciers.  By  John  Tyndall, 
LL.D.,  F.R.S.  (illustrated). 

Contents  (in  part) : — Oceanic  Distillation  ; Archi- 
tecture of  Snow  ; The  Motion  of  Glaciers  ; Icicles  ; 
Erratic  Blocks;  Tropical  Rains;  Atomic  Poles; 
Birth  of  a Crevasse  ; Moraine  Ridges,  etc.,  etc.,  etc. 
No.  3.  Physics  and  Politics:— An  Appli- 
cation of  the  Principles  of  Natural  Selection  and 
Heredity  to  Political  Society.  By  Walter  Bage- 
hot,  Author  of  “ The  English  Constitution,” 
etc. 

Contents  . — The  Preliminary  Age ; the  Use  of 
Conflict ; Nation  Making  ; the  Age  of  Discussion  ; 
Verifiable  Progress  Politically  Considered. 

No.  4.  Evidence  as  to  Man’s  Place  in 
Nature.  By  Thomas  Huxley,  F.R.S.  (illus- 
trated). 

Contents The  Natural  History  of  the  Manlike 
Apes ; The  Relations  of  Man  to  the  Lower  Ani- 
mals ; Fossil  Remains  of  Man. 

No.  5.  Education:  Intellectual,  Moral 
and  Physical.  By  Herbert  Spencer. 
Contents  What  Knowledge  is  of  Most  Worth  ? 
Intellectual  Education  ; Moral  Education;  Physi- 
cal Education. 

No.  6.  Town  Geology.  By  the  Rev. 
Charles  Kingsley,  F.R.S.,  Canon  of  Chester. 
Contents: — The  Soil  of  the  Field;  the  Pebbles 
in  the  Street ; the  Stones  in  the  Wall ; the  Coal  in 
the  Fire  ; the  Lime  in  the  Mortar  ; the  Slates  on 
the  Roof. 

No.  7.  The  Conservation  of  Energy. 

By  Balfour  Stewart,  F.R.S.  (illustrated). 
Contents  : — What  is  Energy  ? Mechanical  En- 
ergy and  its  Change  into  Heat ; The  Forces  and 
Energies  of  Nature;  Transmutations  of  Energy; 
the  Dissipation  of  Energy ; the  Position  of  Life  ; 
Correlation  of  Nervous  and  Mental  Forces. 

No.  8.  Tlie  Study  of  Languages  brought 
back  to  its  true  Principles.  By  C.  Marcel. 
Contents  : — Subdivision  and  Order  of  Study  ; 
the  Art  of  Reading  ; the  Art  of  Hearing ; the  Art 
of  Speaking  ; the  Art  of  Writing ; Mental  Culture  ; 
Routine. 

No.  9.  Tlie  Data  of  Etliics.  By  Herbert 
Spencer. 

Contents  : — Conduct  in  General ; Evolution  of 
Conduct;  Good  and  Bad  Conduct;  Ways  of  Judg- 


i ing  Conduct ; The  Physical  View  ; The  Biological 
View ; the  Psychological  View ; the  Sociological 
View  ; Criticisms  and  Explanations  ; Relativity  of 
Pains  and  Pleasures  ; Egoism  vs.  Altruism ; Al- 
truism vs.  Egoism;  Trial  and  Compromise;  Con- 
ciliation ; Absolute  Ethics  and  Relative  Ethics ; 
the  Scope  of  Ethics. 

No.  10.  Tlie  Theory  of  Sound  in  its  Rela- 
tion to  Music.  By  Prof.  Pietro  Blaserna,  of 
the  Royal  University  of  Rome  (illustrated). 
Contents  (in  part) ; — Periodic  Movements,  vibra- 
tion ; Transmission  of-  Sound;  Characteristics  of 
Sound,  and  difference  between  musical  sound  and 
noise ; Discords ; Quality  or  timbre  of  musical 
sounds ; Italian  and  German  music,  etc.,  etc. 

Nos.  11  and  12.  Tlie  Naturalist  on  tlie 
Stiver  Amazons  :— A Record  of  Adventures, 
Habits  of  Animals,  Sketches  of  Brazilian  and 
Indian  Life,  and  Aspects  of  Nature  under  the. 
Equator,  during  eleven  years  of  Travel.  By 
Henry  Walter  Bates,  F.R.S. 

***  One  of  the  most  charming  books  of  travel  in 
our  language. 

No.  13.  Mind  and  Body:  The  Theories  of 
their  Relation.  By  Alexander  Bain,  LL.D., 
Professor  of  Logic  in  the  University  of  Aber* 
deen. 

Contents : — The  Question  Stated  ; Connection  of 
Mind  and  Body ; the  Connection  viewed  as  corre- 
spondence or  concomitant  variation  ; General  Laws 
of  Alliance  of  Mind  and  Body:  the  Feelings  and 
will  ; the  Intellect  ; How  are  Mind  and  Body 
United  ? History  of  the  Theories  of  the  Soul. 

No.  14.  Tlie  Wonders  of  the  Heavens. 

By  Camille  Flammarion  (illustrated). 

Contents  (in  part) The  Heavens  ; the  Milky 
Way  ; Double,  Multiple  and  Colored  Suns ; the 
Planets ; the  Earth  ; Plurality  of  Inhabited  Worlds  * 
Infinite  Space;  Constellations;  The  Sun  ; Comets; 
the  Moon,  etc.,  etc. 

No.  15.  longevity : the  Means  of  Prolong- 
ing Life  after  the  Middle  Age.  By  John  Gard- 
ner, M.  D. 

Contents  (in  part) : — Is  the  Duration  of  Life  in 
any  way  within  our  power?  Physiology  of  Ad- 
vanced Age  ; Heredity  ; Established  Facts  regard- 
ing Longevity,  etc.,  etc. 

No.  16.  On  the  Origin  of  Species ; or  the 

Causes  of  the  Phenomena  of  Organic  Nature  : A 
Course  of  Six  Lectures.  By  Thomas  H.  Hux- 
ley, F.R.S. 

Contents :— Present  Condition  of  Organic  Nature  ; 
Past  Condition  of  Organic  Nature  ; Origination  of 
Organic  Beings  ; Perpetuation  of  Living  Beings  ; 
Conditions  of  Existence  ; A Critical  Examination 
of  Mr.  Darwin’s  Great  Work, 

No.  17.  Progress:  its  haw  and  Cause; 

with  other  disquisitions.  By  Herbert  Spencer. 


Contents : — Progress  ; the  Physiology  of  Laugh- 
ter : Origin  and  Functions  of  Music  ; the  Develop- 
ment Hypothesis ; the  Social  Organism ; the  Use 
of  Anthropomorphism. 

No.  18.  Lessons  in  Electricity.  By 

John  Tyndall,  F.R.S.  (illustrated). 

Contents  (in  part) : — The  Art  of  Experiment ; 
Electric  Induction ; Lichtenberg’s  Figures ; Elec- 
trics and  Non-Electrics  ; the  Leyden  Jar  ; Physio- 
logical Effect  of  the  Electric  Discharge ; Atmos- 
pheric Electricity,  etc.,  etc. 

No.  19.  Familiar  Essays  on  Scientific 
Subjects.  By  Richard  A.  Proctor,  F.R.A.S. 
Contents  Oxygen  in  the  Sun  ; Sun-spot,  Storm 
and  Famine ; New  ways  of  Measuring  the  Sun’s 
Distance  ; Drifting  Light-waves  ; The  new  Star 
which  faded  into  Star-mist ; Star-grouping. 

No.  20.  The  Romance  of  Astronomy. 

By  R.  Kalley  Miller,  M.A. 

Contents ' The  Planets  ; Astrology  ; The  Moon  ; 
the  Sun  ; the  Comets  ; Laplace’s  Nebular  Hypoth- 
esis ; the  Stars  ; the  Nebulae  ; Appendix. 

No.  21.  On  the  Physical  Basis  of  Life. 

With  other  Essays.  By  Thomas  H.  Hux- 
ley, F.R.S. 

Contents  : — Physical  Basis  of  Life  ; Scientific 
Aspects  of  Positivism  ; A Piece  of  Chalk  ; Geolog- 
ical Contemporaneity  ; A Liberal  Education  and 
where  to  find  it. 

No.  22.  Seeing  and  Thinking.  By  Prof. 
William  Kingdon  Clifford,  F.R.S.  (illustrated). 
Contents : — The  Eye  and  the  Brain  ; the  Eye  and 
Seeing  ; the  Brain  and  Thinking ; On  Boundaries 
in  General. 

No.  23.  Scientific  Sophisms:— A Review 
of  Current  Theories  concerning  Atoms,  Apes 
and  Men.  By  Samuel  Wainright,  D.D. 
Contents  .-—The  Right  of  Search  ; Evolution  : A 
Puerile  Hypothesis  ; Scientific  Levity ; a House  of 
Cards  ; Sophisms  ; Protoplasm  ; the  Three  Begin- 
nings ; the  Three  Barriers  ; Atoms  ; Apes  ; Men  ; 
Anima  Mundi. 

No.  24.  Popular  Scientific  ILectures. 

By  Prof.  H.  Helmholtz  (illustrated). 

Contents  : — The  Relation  of  Optics  to  Painting, 
i.  Form.  2.  Shade.  3.  Color.  4.  Harmony  of 
Color  ; the  Origin  of  the  Planetary  System  ; 
Thought  in  Medicine  ; Academic  Freedom  in  Ger- 
man Universities. 

No.  25.  The  Origin  of  Nations Com- 
prising two  divisions,  viz.: — “ Early  Civiliza- 
tions,” and  “Ethnic  Affinities.”  By  George 
Rawlinson,  M.A.,  Camden  Professor  of  Ancient 
History  in  Oxford  University,  England. 

Contents  : — Early  Civilizations  Introduction  ; 
Antiquity  of  Civilization  in  England  ; Antiquity  of 
Civilization  at  Babylon  : Phoenician  Civilization ; 
Civilizations  of  Phrygia,  Lydia,  the  Troas,  Assyria, 
Media,  India,  etc.;  Civilization  of 'the  British  Celts  ; 
Civilization  of  the  Etruscans ; Results  of  jthe  In- 
quiry. Ethnic  Affinities  ; — Chief  Japhetic  Races  ; 
Subdivisions  of  the  Japhetic  Races  ; Chief  Hametic 
Races:  Subdivisions  of  Cush  ; Subdivisions  of  Miz- 
raim  and  Canaan  ; the  Semitic  Races  ; Subdivis- 
ions of  the  Semitic  Races. 

No.  26.  The  Evolutionist  at  Earge.  By 

Grant  Allen. 

Contents  (in  part) : — Microscopic  Brains  ; Slugs 
and  Snails  ; Butterfly  Psychology  ; In  Summer 
Fields;  Speckled  Trout;  Origin  of  Walnuts ; Dogs 
and  Masters,  etc.,  etc. 

No.  27.  The  History  of  Eandholding 
in  England.  By  Joseph  Fisher,  F.R.H.S. 
Contents  (in  part) : — The  Aborigines ; the  Scan- 
dinavians ; the  Plantagenets  ; the  Stuarts  ; the  Ro- 
mans ; the  Normans;  the  Tudors;  the  House  of 
Brunswick  ; Land  and  Labor,  etc.,  etc. 

No.  28.  Fashion  in  Deformity,  as  Illus- 
trated in  the  Customs  of  Barbarous  and  Civil- 
ized Races.  By  William  Henry  Flower,  F.R.S. 
(illustrated).  To  which  is  added  : — Manners 
and  Fashion.  By  Herbert  Spencer. 
Contents  (in  part): — Fashions  in  Coiffure  ; Tat- 
tooing; Deforming  the  Teeth  ; Deforming  the 
Feet ; Eradicating  the  Eyebrows ; Ornaments  for 
the  Nose,  Ears,  Lips ; Compressing  the  Skull ; 
Effects  of  Tight  Lacing,  etc.,  etc. 


No.  29.  Facts  and  Fictions  of  Zoology. 

By  Andrew  Wilson,  Ph.D.  (illustrated). 

Contents  Zoological  Myths  ; the  Sea  Serpents 
of  Science  ; Some  Animal  Architects  ; Parasites 
and  Their  Development  ; What  I saw  in  an  Ant’s 
Nest. 

Nos.  30  and  31.  On  the  Study  o£ 
Words.  By  Richard  Chenevix  Trench,  D.D. 
Contents  :— Introduction  ; the  Poetry  in  Words  ; 
the  Morality  in  Words  ; the  History  in  Words ; 
the  Rise  of  New  Words  ; the  Distinction  of  Words  ; 
the  Schoolmaster’s  use  of  Words. 

No.  32.  Hereditary  Traits,  and  other 
Essays.  By  Richard  A.  Proctor,  F.R.A.S. 
Contents  :— Hereditary  Traits  ; Artificial  Som- 
nambulism ; Bodily  Illness  as  a Mental  Stimulant ; 
Dual  Consciousness. 

No.  33.  Vignettes  from  Nature.  By 

Grant  Allen. 

Contents  (in  part) :— Fallow  Deer  ; the  Heron’s 
Haunt ; Wild  Thyme  ; the  Fall  of  the  Leaf ; the 
Hedgehog’s  Hole ; Seaside  Weeds ; the  Donkey’s 
Ancestors. 

No.  34.  Tlie  Philosophy  of  Style.  By 

Herbert  Spencer.  To  which  is  added  :— The 
Mother  Tongue.  By  Alexander  Bain, 
LL.D. 

Contents: — The  Principle  of  Economy  applied 
to  words;  Effect  of  Figurative  Language  Ex- 
plained ; Arrangement  of  Minor  Images  in  build- 
ing up  a thought ; The  Superiority  of  Poetry  to 
Prose  explained ; Causes  of  Force  in  Language 
which  depend  upon  Economy  of  the  Mental  Sensi- 
bilities ; the  Mother  Tongue. 

No.  35.  Oriental  Religions.  Edited  by 
Rev.  John  Caird,  D.D.,  President  of  the  Uni- 
versity of  Glasgow. 

Contents  : — Brahmanism  ; Buddhism  ; Confu- 
cianism ; Zoroaster  and  the  Zend  Avesta. 

No.  36.  Iiectures  on  Evolution,  with  a« 
Appendix  on  the  Study  of  Riology.  By 
Thomas  H.  Huxley,  F.R.S.  (illustrated). 
Contents : — The  Three  Hypotheses  respecting 
the  History  of  Nature ; the  Hypothesis  of  Evolu- 
tion— the  Neutral  and  Favorable  Evidence  ; the 
Demonstrative  Evidence  of  Evolution ; the  Study 
of  Biology. 

No.  37.  Six  Lectures  on  Light.  By  John 

Tyndall,  F.R.S.  (illustrated). 

Contents : — Introductory  ; Origin  of  Physical 
Theories ; Relation  of  Theories  to  Experience ; 
Chromatic  Phenomena  produced  by  Crystals ; 
Range  of  Vision  and  Range  of  Radiation  ; Spec- 
trum Analysis. 

Nos.  38  and  39.  Geological  Sketches 
at  Home  and  Abroad  \ in  two  Parts,  each 
complete  in  itself.  By  Archibald  Geikie, 
F.R.S. 

Contents  : Part  I : — My  first  Geological  Excur- 
sion ; “ The  Old  Man  of  Hoy  ” ; the  Baron’s  Stone 
of  Killochan  ; the  Colliers  of  Carrick  ; Among  the 
Volcanoes  of  Central  France  ; the  Old  Glaciers  of 
Norway  and  Scotland ; Rock-Weathering  meas- 
ured by  Decay  of  Tombstones.  Part  II : A Frag- 
ment of  Primeval  Europe  ; In  Wyoming ; The 
Geysers  of  the  Yellowstone  ; the  Lava  fields  of 
Northwestern  Europe ; the  Scottish  School  of 
Geology  ; Geographical  Evolution  ; the  Geologi- 
cal influences  which  have  affected  the  course  of 
British  History. 

No.  40.  The  Scientific  Evidence  of  Or- 
ganic Evolution.  By  George  J.  Romanes, 
F.R.S. 

Contents  (in  part) : — The  Argument  from  Classi- 
fication— from  Morphology  or  Structure — from 
Geology— from  Geographical  Distribution— from 
Embryology,  etc.,  etc. 

No.  41.  Current  Discussions  in  Sci- 
ence. By  W.  M.  Williams,  F.C.S. 

Contents  (in  part) : The  Fuel  of  the  Sun  ; Ori- 
gin of  Lunar  Volcanoes ; Aerial  Exploration  of 
the  Arctic  Regions ; The  Air  of  Stove-heated 
Rooms,  etc.,  etc. 

No.  42.  History  of  the  Science  of  Poli- 
tics. By  Frederick  Pollock. 

Contents:  The  Place  of  Politics  in  Human 
Knowledge  ; The  Classic  Period — Pericles— Soc- 
rates— Plato— Aristotle,  etc.;  the  Medieval  Period 


— the  Papacy  and  the  Empire  ; Beginning  of  the 
Modern  Period — Machiavelli — Hobbes  ; the  Mod- 
ern Period — Locke — Hooker— Blackstone — Hume— 
Montesquieu — Burke  ; the  Present  Century — Ben- 
tham — Austin — Kant — Savigny — Herbert  Spencer. 

No.  43.  Darwin  and  Humboldt,  their 
Lives  and  Works Contains  a series  oS 
notices  of  Darwin,  by  Huxley,  Romanes,  Geikia, 
Thiselton  Dyer ; also  the  late  Prof.  Agassiz’s 
Centennial  Address  on  the  Life  and  Work  of 
Alexander  von  Humboldt. 

Nos.  44  and  45.  The  Dawn  of  History : 

an  introduction  to  Pre-Historic  Study.  Edited 
by  C.  h.  Keary,  M.A.,  of  the  British  Museum. 
In  two  Parts. 

Contents  of  Part  I : Earliest  Traces  of  Man  ; the 
Second  Stone  Age ; the  Growth  of  Languages ; 
Families  of  Languages ; the  Nations  of  the  Old 
World;  Early  Social  Life  ; the  Village  Community. 
Contents  of  Part  II:  Religion;  Aryan  Religion; 
the  Other  World  ; Mythologies  and  Folk  Tales ; 
Picture  Writing  ; Phonetic  Writing  ; Conclusion. 

No.  46.  The  Diseases  of  Memory.  By 

Th.  Ribot.  (Translated  from  the  French  by 
J.  Fitzgerald.) 

Contents Memory  as  a Biological  Fact  ; Gen- 
eral Amnesia ; Partial  Amnesia ; Exaltation  of 
Memory,  or  Hypermnesia  ; Conclusion. 

No.  47.  The  Childhood  of  Religions. 

By  Edward  Clodd,  F.R.A.S. 

Contents  (in  part) Legends  of  the  Past  about 
Creation ; Creation  as  told  by  Science  ; Legends 
of  the  Past  about  Mankind  ; Ancient  and  Modern 
Hindu  Religions,  etc.,  etc. 

No.  48.  Life  in  Nature.  By  James  Hinton, 
Author  of  “ Man  and  his  Dwelling  Place.” 
Contents  (in  part). — Function,*  Living  Forms; 
Is  Life  Universal  ? Nutrition  ; Nature  and  Man  ; 
the  Life  of  Man,  etc.,  etc. 

No.  49.  The  Sun:— its  Constitution;  its  Phe- 
nomena ; its  Condition.  By  Nathan  T.  Carr, 
LL.D.,  Judge  of  the  Ninth  Judicial  Circuit  of 
Indiana. 

Contents  (in  part)  : — The  Sun’s  Atmosphere  ; the 
Chromosphere ; the  Photosphere ; Production  of 
the  Sun’s  Spots  ; the  Question  of  the  Extinction  of 
the  Sun,  etc.,  etc. 

Nos.  50  and  51.  Money  and  the  Mech- 
anism of  Exchange.  By  Prof.  W.  Stan- 
ley Jevons,  F.R.S. 

Contents  (in  part) : — The  Functions  of  Money ; 
Early  History  of  Money ; the  Metals  as  Money  ; 
Principles  of  Circulation  ; Promissory  Notes  ; the 
Banking  System  ; the  Clearing  House ; Quantity 
of  Money  needed  by  a Nation,  etc.,  etc. 

No.  52.  The  Diseases  of  the  Will.  By 
Th.  Ribot.  (Translated  from  the  French  by  J. 
Fitzgerald.) 

Contents : — The  Question  Stated  ; Impairment 
of  the  Will — Lack  of  Impulsion — Excess  of  Impul- 
sion ; Impairment  of  Voluntary  attention  ; Caprice  ; 
Extinction  of  the  Will ; Conclusion. 

No.  53.  Animal  Automatism,  and  Other 
Essays.  By  Prof.  T.  H.  Huxley,  F.R.S. 
Contents  : — Animal  Automatism  ; Science  and 
Culture ; Elementary  Instruction  in  Physiology ; 
the  Border  Territory  between  Animals  and  Plants  ; 
Universities,  Actual  and  Ideal. 

No.  54.  The  Birth  and  Growth  of 
Myth.  By  Edward  Clodd,  F.R.A.S. 

Contents  (in  part) : — Nature  as  viewed  by  Primi- 
tive Man  ; Sun  and  Moon  in  Mythology ; the  Hindu 
Sun  and  Cloud  Myth  ; Demonology  ; Beast  Fables  ; 
Totemism,  etc.,  etc. 

No.  55.  The  Scientific  Basis  of  Morals, 

and  Other  Essays.  By  William  Kingdon 
Clifford,  F.R.S. 

Contents Scientific  Basis  of  Morals  ; Right  and 
Wrong;  the  Ethics  of  Belief;  the  Ethics  of  Re- 
ligion. 


Nos.  56  and  57.  Illusions:  A Psy- 
chological Study.  By  James  Sully. 
Contents  : — The  Study  of  Illusion  ; Classification 
of  Illusions  ; Illusions  of  Perception  ; Dreams  ; 
Illusions  of  Introspection  ; Other  Quasi-Presenta- 
tive  Illusions  ; Illusions  of  Memory  ; Illusions  of 
Belief. 

Nos.  58  and  59  (two  double  numbers,  30  cents 
each).  The  Origin  of  Species.  By  Charles 
Darwin. 

***  This  is  Darwin’s  famous  work  complete, 
with  index  and  glossary. 

No.  60.  The  Childhood  of  the  World. 

By  Edward  Clodd,  F.R.A.S. 

Contents  (in  part) Man’s  First  Wants,  Man’s 
First  Tools,  Fire,  Dwellings,  Use  of  Metals ; Lan- 
guage, Writing,  Counting,  Myths  about  Sun  and 
Moon,  Stars,  Eclipses  ; Ideas  about  the  Soul,  Be- 
lief in  Witchcraft,  Fetichism,  Idolatry,  etc.,  etc. 
No.  61.  Miscellaneous  Essays.  By  Rich- 
ard A.  Proctor. 

Contents: — Strange  Coincidences;  Coincidences 
and  Superstitions ; Gambling  Superstitions ; 
Learning  Languages  ; Strange  Sea-Creatures  ; the 
Origin  of  Whales  ; Prayer  and  Weather. 

No.  62  (Double  number,  30  cents).  The  Re- 
ligions of  the  Ancient  World. 

Contents : — Religions  of  the  Ancient  Egyptians, 
ancient  Iranians,  Assyrians,  Babylonians,  ancient 
Sanskritic  Indians,  Phoenicians,  Carthaginians, 
Etruscans,  ancient  Greeks  and  ancient  Romans. 
No.  63.  Progressive  Morality.  By 
Thomas  Fowler,  F.S.A.,  President  of  Corpus 
Christi  College,  Oxford. 

Contents:  — The  Sanctions  of  Conduct;  the 
Moral  Sanction,  or  Moral  Sentiment  ; Analysis 
and  Formation  of  the  Moral  Sentiment ; the  Moral 
Test ; Examples  of  the  practical  applications  oi 
the  Moral  Test. 

No.  64.  The  Distribution  of  Life.  By 

Alferd  Russel  Wallace  and  W.  T.  Thiselton 
Dyer. 

Contents  (in  part) :— Geographical  Distributfbn 
of  Land  Animals ; Distribution  of  Marine  Ani- 
mals ; Relations  of  Marine  with  Terrestrial  Zoolog- 
ical Regions;  Distribution  of  Vegetable  Life; 
Northern,  Southern,  Tropical  Flora,  etc.,  etc. 

No.  65.  Conditions  ct  Mental  Devel- 
opment, and  Other  Essays.  By  William 
Kingdon  Clifford,  F.R.S. 

Contents  :— Conditions  of  Mental  Development ; 
Aims  and  Instruments  of  Scientific  Thought ; 
Atoms  ; The  First  and  the  Last  Catastrophe. 

No.  66.  Technical  Education,  and  other 
Essays.  By  Thomas  H.  Huxley,  F.R.S. 
Contents: — Technical  Education;  The  Connec- 
tion of  the  Biological  Sciences  with  Medicine; 
Joseph  Priestley ; On  Sensation  and  the  Unity  of 
Structure  of  the  Sensiferous  Organs ; On  Certain 
Errors  respecting  the  Structure  of  the  Heart  at- 
tributed to  Aristotle. 

No.  67.  The  Black  Death  $ An  account  of 
the  Great  Pestilence  of  the  14th  Century.  By 
J.  F.  C.  Hecker,  M.D. 

Contents : — General  Observations  ; the  Disease  ; 
Causes — Spread,  Mortality ; Moral  Effects  ; Physi- 
cians ; Appendix. 

No.  68  (Special  Number,  10  cents).  Three 
Essays,  viz.:  Laws,  and  the  Order  of  their 
Discovery  ; Origin  of  Animal  Worship  ; Politi- 
cal Fetichism.  By  Herbert  Spencer. 

No.  69  (Double  Number,  30  cents).  Fetich- 
ism : A Contribution  to  Anthropology  and  the 
History  of  Religion.  By  Fritz  Schultze,  Ph.D. 
Translated  from  the  German  by  J.  Fitzgerald, 
M.A. 

Contents ;— The  Mind  of  the  Savage ; Relation 
between  the  Savage  Mind  and  its  Object ; Fetich- 
ism as  a Religion  ; Various  Objects  of  Fetich  Wor- 
ship;—The  Highest  Grade  of  Fetichism;  Aim  of 
Fetichism. 


Catalogue  of  the  Humboldt  Library 

(CONTINUED). 


No.  70.  Essays,  Speculative  and  Practical.  By 

Herbert  Spencer. 

Contents: — Specialized  Administration;  “The  Collective  Wisdom;” 
Morals  and  Moral  Sentiments;  Reasons  for  Dissenting  from  the  Phi- 
losophy of  Comte;  What  is  Electricity? 


No.  71.  Anthropology.  By  Daniel  Wilson,  LL.  D. 

Contents: — Scope  of  the  Science;  Man’s  Place  in  Nature;  Origin  of 
Man;  Races  of  Mankind;  Antiquity  of  Man;  Language;  Development  of 
Civilization. 


No.  72.  The  Dancing  Mania  of  the  Middle  Ages. 

By  J.  F.  C.  Hecker,  M.  D. 

Contents  (in  part): — The  Dancing  Mania  in  Germany  and  the  Nether- 
lands; The  Dancing  Mania  in  Italy;  The  Dancing  Mania  in  Abyssinia. 


No.  73.  Evolution  in  History,  Language,  and 
Science.  Lectures  delivered  at  the  London  Crystal  Palace  School 
of  Art>,  Science,  and  Literature. 

Contents: — The  Principle  of  Causal  Evolution;  Scientific  Study  of 
Geography;  Hereditary  Tendencies;  Vicissitudes  of  the  English  Lan- 
guage. 


Nos.  74,  75,  76,  77.  The  Descent  of  Man,  and  Se- 
lection in  Relation  to  Sex.  By  Charles  Darwin. 

***  Price,  Parts  74,  75,  76,  fifteen  cents  each;  No.  77  (double  num- 
ber), thirty  cents;  the  entire  work,  seventy-five  cents. 


No.  78.  Historical  Sketch  of  the  Distribution  of 
Land  in  England.  By  Prof.  Wm.  Lloyd  Birkbeck,  Cam- 
bridge University. 

(Ready  Feb.  25,  1886.) 


Valuable  Books 

For  Sale  by  the  Publisher  of 

THE  HUMBOLDT  LIBRARY. 


DICK'S 


containing  6,422  practical  receipts,  embracing  valuable  information  in 
the  Arts,  Professions,  Trades,  Manufactures,  including  Medicine,  Phar- 
macy, and  Domestic  Economy. 

Profusely  illustrated;  607  Royal  Octavo  pages. 

Price,  Cloth,  $5.00;  Sheep,  $6.00. 

DICAN'S  MASONIC  RITUAL  AND  MONITOR. 

or  Guide  to  the  three  Symbolic  Degrees  of  the  Ancient  York  Kite,  En- 
tered Apprentice,  Fellow  Craft,  Master  Mason,  etc. 

Price,  Cloth,  $2.50;  Leather  Tucks  (pocket-book  style).  Gilt  edges, 
$3.00. 

Allyn’s  Ritual  of  Freemasonry, 

containing  a Complete  Key  to  the  Several  Degrees,  Illustrated  with 
Thirty  Copper-plate  Engravings.  To  which  is  added  a Key  to  the 
Phi  Beta  Kappa,  Orange,  and  Odd  Fellows’  Societies. 
Price,  Cloth,  $5.00. 

Lester’s  “Look  to  the  East,” 

containing  the  Complete  Work  of  the  Entered  Apprentice,  Fellow  Craft, 
and  Master  Mason’s  Degrees,  with  the  Ceremonies,  Lectures,  etc. 

Price,  Cloth,  $2.00;  Leather  Tucks  (pocket-book  style),  Gilt  Edges, 
$2.50. 

LANDER’S 

Revised  Work  on  Odd-Fellowship. 

Price,  Paper,  25  cents. 


The  above  works  sent,  post  free,  on  receipt 

of  Price. 

J.  FITZGERALD, 

108  Chambers  Street,  New  York. 


THE  CHANDOS  CLASSICS 

OF  GENERAL  LITERATURE. 

Bound  in  cloth,  gilt,  only  80  cents  per  vol.  Sent  to  any  address 
post  free,  on  receipt  of  the  price  by 

J.  FITZGERALD,  108  Chambers  Street,  N.  Y. 


'10, 

11. 

12, 

13. 

14. 

15. 

16. 
18, 


19. 

20. 

21. 

22. 

23. 

24. 

25. 

26. 

27. 

28. 

29. 

30. 

31. 

32. 

33. 

34. 

35. 

36. 

37. 

38. 

39. 

40. 


41. 

42. 


43. 


45. 

46, 

47. 

48, 


Shakspeare  (Complete  Works  of). 
Byron. 

Scott. 

Arabian  NIglits  (The)  Entertain- 
ments. A new  edition,  revised  for  Home 
Reading.  By  Geo.  Fyler  Townsend,  M.A. 

Eliza  Cook’s  Poems. 

Legendary  Ballads  of  England 
and  Scotland. 

Burns. 

Johnson’s  Lives  of  the  most  Emi- 
nent English  Poets,  with  sketch  of 
the  author’s  life  by  Sir  Walter  Scott. 
Bante  (The  Vision  of).  Translated  by 
Rev.  H.  F.  Cary,  A.M. 

Moore’s  Poetical  Works. 

Dr.  Syntax’s  Three  Tours,  with  Col- 
ored illustrations. 

Butler’s  Hudibras. 

Cowper’s  Poetical  Works. 
Milton’s  Poetical  Works. 
Wordsworth’s  Poetical  Works. 
England : Its  Constitutional  His- 
tory. Edward  I.  to  Henry  VII.,  by  Hen- 
ry Hallam. 

History  of  the  Saracens.  By  Edward 
Gibbon  and  Simon  Ockley. 

Spanish  Ballads.  Translated  by  J.  G. 
Lockhart,  and  The  Chronicle  of  the 
Cid,  by  Robt.  Southey. 

Robinson  Crusoe.  Original  illustra- 
tions by  Ernest  Griset. 

Swiss  Family  Robinson.  Beautiful- 
ly and  fully  illustrated. 

Mrs.  Hemans’  Poetical  Works. 
Grimm’s  Fairy  Tales. 

Andersen’s  (Hans)  Fairy  Tales. 
Lives  of  Eminent  Novelists  and 
Dramatists.  By  Sir  Walter  Scott. 
Essays  on  Chivalry,  Romance  and  the 
Drama.  By  Sir  Walter  Scott, 
Shelley’s  Poetical  Works. 
Campbell’s  Poetical  Works. 
Beats’  Poetical  Works. 
Coleridge’s  Poetical  Works. 
Pope’s  Iliad  of  Homer.  Illustrated 
with  Flaxman’s  designs. 

Pope’s  Odyssey  of  Homer.  Illustrat- 
ed with  Flaxman’s  designs. 

Hood’s  Poetical  Works. 
Representative  Actors.  By  W.  Clark 
Russell.  - 

England.  (Romance  of  History.) 
France.  Ditto. 

Italy.  Ditto. 

Spain.  Ditto. 

India.  Ditto. 

Romantic  Tales  founded  on  historical  facts 
in  the  history  of  these  countries. 
German  Literature  (Beauties  of). 
Don  Quixote  De  La  Mancha  (Ad- 
ventures of). 

Eastern  Tales.  In  the  vein  of  the  Ara- 
bian Nights — suitable  for  the  youug. 

Book  of  Authors.  A collection  of  criti- 
cisms, personal  descriptions,  etc.,  referring 
to  English  men  of  literature  in  every  age. 
By  W.  Clark  Russell. 

Pope’s  Poetical  Works. 

Mackay’s  (Charles)  Poetical 
Works. 

Goldsmith’s  Poems,  Dramas,  and 
the  Vicar  of  Wakefield. 

The  Koran-The  Alkoran  of  Mo- 
hammed. Translated  by  George  Sale. 


490  Oxenford’s  French  Songs,  including 
Costello’s  Lays  of  the  Troubadours. 

50.  Gil  Bias  (The  Adventures  of),  with 
notes  and  illustrations. 

52.  Virgil  (Dry den’s)  (The  Works  of  '. 

53.  Bunyan’s  Holy  Afar.  Illustrated. 

54.  Dodd’s  Beauties  of  Shakspeare. 

55.  Romance  of  London.  Historic  sketch- 

es, remarkable  duels,  notorious  highway- 
men, rogueries,  crimes  and  punishments,  etc. 
By  John  Timbs,  F.S.A. 

56.  Romance  of  London.  Supernatural 

stories,  sights  and  shows,  strange  adven- 
tures, and  remarkable  persons.  By  John 
Times,  F.S.A. 

57.  A Century  of  Anecdote.  A Collection 

of  the  best  modern  anecdotes  of  Men  of 
Letters,  Law  and  Lawyers,  Eccentric  Per- 
sons, etc.  By  John  Timbs,  F.S.A. 

58.  Walton  and  Cotton’s  Angler.  A 

new  edition,  with  notes  and  illustrations. 

59.  Herbert’s  (George)  Works.  In  Prose 

and  Verse. 

60.  Heber’s  (Bishop)  Poetical  Works. 

61 . Half-Hours  with  the  Best  Authors 


62. 

Ditto. 

** 

63. 

Ditto. 

*** 

64. 

Ditto. 

**** 

A compendium  of  choice  Readings,  show- 
ing style  of  all  noted  writers,  prose  and 
poetical,  with  brief  biographical  and 
critical  notices  of  the  authors.  By  Chas. 
Knight.  Freely  Illustrated,  forming 
a treasury  of  literature  for  all  readers. 

65.  Bunyan’s  Pilgrim’s  Progress.  A 

clear  and  large  type  edition,  with  notes  and 
illustrations. 

66.  Fugitive  Poetry  of  the  Last  Three 

Centuries.  A valuable  collection  of  an- 
onymous poetry,  sacred  and  secular,  and 
Translations  gathered  from  many  sources. 
Compiled  and  edited  by  J.  C.  Hutchieson. 

67.  Pepys’ Diary.  Edited  by  Richard  Lord 

Brabrooke. 

68.  Evelyn’s  Diary.  Edited  by  William 

Bray,  Esq. 

69.  Townsend’s  Every-Day  Book  of 

Modern  Literature.* 

70.  Townsend’s  Every-Day  Book  of 

Modern  Literature.** 

A series  of  short  readings  from  the  best 
authors. 

71.  Montgomery  (James)  (Poems  of. 

72.  Spenser’s  Faery  Queen.  A version  of 

the  great  Elizabethan  Poet's  Masterpiece  in 
modern  English.  With  Memoir,  notes  and 
glossary. 

73.  Natural  History  of  Selborne  (The) 

and  Naturalist’s  Calendar.  By 

Rev.  Gilbert  White,  A.M.  Beautifully  and 
fully  illustrated. 

74.  Keble’s  Christian  Year. 

75.  Lamb’s  (Charles)  Poems  and  Es- 

says. With  choice  illustrations,  head  and 
tail  pieces,  etc. 

76.  Roseoe’s  Italian  Novelists. 

77.  Roscoe’s  German  Novelists. 

78.  Roscoe’s  Spanish  Novelists. 

Choice  stories  and  selections  from  the  great 
novelists  of  these  countries,  translated 
with  critical  and  biographical  notices  by 
Thomas  Roscoe. 

***  And  20  other  Volumes.  Complete  Catalogue 
sent  free  to  any  address. 


V 


Humboldt  Library  Catalogue. 


Price  : Single  Number  ........  15  Cents . 

Per  Year  ( 12  Numbers ) . $1*50. 


By  Prof.  T.  H.  Huxley. 

No. 

4.  Man’s  Place  in  Nature.  (Illustrated.) 

16.  The  Origin  of  Species. 

21.  The  Physical  Basis  of  Life,  etc. 

364  Lectures  on  Evolution.  (Illustrated.) 

53*  Animal  Automatism,  etc. 

66.  Technical  Education,  etc. 

By  Prof.  Geo.  Rawlinson. 

25.  The  Origin  of  Nations. 

62.  Religions  of  the  Ancient  World.  (Doubl 
No.,  30  cts.) 

By  Herbert  Spencer. 

5.  Education,  Intellectual,  Moral,  etc. 

9.  The  Data  of  Ethics. 

17.  Progress,  its  Law  and  Cause,  etc. 

34.  The  Philosophy  of  Style. 

By  Th.  Ribot. 

46.  The  Diseases  of  Memory. 

52.  The  Diseases  of  the  Will. 

By  Charles  Darwin. 

58.  \ The  Origin  of  Species.  (Two  Double 

59.  ) Nos.,  30  cents  each.) 

By  Various  Authors. 

3.  Physics  and  Politics.  Walter  Bagehot. 

6.  Town  Geology.  Chas.  Kingsley. 

7.  The  Conservation  of  Energy  (Illustrated). 

Balfour  Stewart. 

S.  The  Study  of  Languages.  C.  Marcel. 
1:0.  Sound  and  Music  (Illustrated).  P.  Blas- 
erna. 

11.  ) The  Naturalist  on  the  River  Amazons. 

12.  ) Henry  Walter  Bates. 

13.  Mind  and  Body.  Alex.  Bain. 

M-  Wonders  of  the  Pleavens  (Illustrated). 

Camille  Flammarion. 

15.  Longevity:  Means  of  Prolonging  Life  af- 
ter Middle  Age.  John  Gardner,  M.D. 
20.  Romance  of  Astronomy.  R.  K.  Miller. 

23.  Scientific  Sophisms.  S.  Wainwright. 

24.  Scientific  Lectures  (Illustrated).  Prof. 

Helmholtz. 

27.  Landholding  in  England,  /jos.  Fisher. 

28.  Fashion  in  Deformity  (Illustrated).  W. 

H.  Flower. 

29.  Facts  and  Fictions  of  Zoology  (Illustr.). 

A.  Wilson. 

30.  ] The  Study  of  Words.  Richard  Che- 

31.  S nevix  Trench. 


By  William  Kingdon  Clifford. 

No. 

22.  Seeing  and  Thinking. 

55.  The  Scientific  Basis  of  Morals,  etc. 

65.  Conditions  of  Mental  Development,  etc 

By  Edward  Clodd. 

47.  . The  Chiklhood  of  Religions. 

54.  The  Birth  and  Growth  of  Myth. 

60.  The  Childhood  of  the  World. 

By  Grant  Allen. 

k6.  The  Evolutionist  at  Large. 

Vignettes  from  Nature. 

v — "j  / By  Richard  A.  Proctor. 

1.  Light  Science  for  Leisure  Hours. 

19.  Familiar  Scientific  Essays. 

32.  Hereditary  Traits,  etc. 

61.  Miscellaneous  Essays. 

By  Prof.  John  Tyndall. 

1 2.  The  Forms  of  Water.  (Illustrated.) 

?8.  Lessons  in  Electricity.  (Illustrated.) 

37.  Six  Lecturesfion  Light.  (Illustrated.) 

By  Various  Authors. 

35.  Oriental  Religions.  John  Caird,  and 
others. 

38.  ) Geological  Sketches.  Archibald 

39.  J Geikie. 

40.  Evidence  of  Organic  Evolution.  G.  J. 

Romanes 

41.  Current  Discussions  in  Science.  W.  M. 

Williams. 

42.  The  Science  of  Politics.  Fred.  Pollock. 

43.  Darwin  and  Humboldt,  Huxley,  Agas- 

siz, and  others.  V 

44.  ) The  Dawn  of  History,  Edited  by  C.  F. 

45.  J Keary,  British  Museum. 

48.  Life  in  Nature  (Illustrated).  Jas.  Hinton. 

49.  The  Sun.  Judge  N.  T.  Garr,  Columbus, 

Ind. 

50.  ) Money  and  the  Mechanism  of  Exchange 
51. 5 W.  Stanley  Jevons. 

56.  [illusions:  A Psychological  Study. 

57.  \ James  Sully. 

03.  Progressive  Morality.  T.  Fowler,  Pres- 
sident  Corpus  Christi  Coll.,  Oxford 
Univ. 

64.  The  Distribution  of  Life.  A.\  Russel 
Wallace  and  W.  T.  ThiseltoW  Dyer. 
67.  The  Black  Death : the  Great  Pestilence 
of  the  14th  Century.  J.  F.  C.  Hecker, 
(Ready  April  io,  1885.) 


3 0112  105256983 


CROSBY’S 


VITALIZED  PHOSPHIT 


COMPOSED 
CF  THE 

NERVE-GIVING 

PRINCIPLES 
OF  THE 


OX  BRAIN 
AND  THE 

EMBRYO 

OF  THE 

WHEAT  AND  OM 


This  is  a standard  preparation  all  physicians  who  treat  nervous  or 
mental  disorders.  It  is  not  a secfPPthe  formula  is  on  every  label.  Its 
careful  chemical  composition  has  b&en  superintended  for  twelve  years  by  a 
Professor  of  Materia  Medica,  and  its  correct  analysis  vouched  for  by  a Pro- 
fessor of  Chemistry.  Physicians  alone  have  prescribed  over  a million  bot- 
tles, curing  nervous  derangements  and  debility. 

It  aids  in  the  bodily,  and  wonderfully  in  the  mental,  growth  of  children 
It  cures  fretfulness  and  sleeplessness. 

By  its  special  tonic  effect  upon  the  nerves,  and  its  vitalizing  influence 
on  the  blood  of  young  persons,  it  brightens  the  eyes  and  gives  good  color  to 
the  lips ; it  ensures  a soft,  smooth  skin,  glossy  hair  and  handsome  nails,  so 
that  these  become  an  inheritance  in  later  years.  It  feeds  the  brain  and 
thus  strengthens  the  intellect,  so  that  study  and  deep  mental  application  may 
be  a pleasure,  not  a toil. 

It  is  used  as  a special  brain  tonic  by  all  the  best  minds  of  this  and  othei 
countries. 

It  strengthens  the  powers  of  digestion,  is  a positive  cure  for  night- 
sweats,  and  prevents  consumption. 

“ It  amplifies  bodily  and  mental  powers  to  the  present  generation  an  ; 
‘ proves  the -survival  of  the  fittest,’  to  the  next.” 

“There  is  no  c*her  Vital  Phosphite ; none  that  is  extracted  from  living 
vegetable  and  animal  tissues.” 

Send  for  Circular. 

F.  CROSBY  CO., 

56  West  25TH  Street,  New  York. 


